Adobe has disowned the anti-Mac comments made by one one of its employees in a recent book. Adobe’s PR director, Russell Brady, who joined the company afer working at Apple, strongly denied any deliberate snub to Apple or any lessening of commitment to the Mac.
Adobe Chastens Windows-favouring Author
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
This article confirms a number of speculations made in the comments of the original article on this issue, namely that these comments were made prior to the release of the G5, when there was a legitimate disparity in performance between Macs and PCs.
It’s clear from this article that Adobe is still deeply committed to the Mac platform.
When I was buying photoshop elements (I know they don’t care much about my $50 or so), I was actually thinking of boycotting Adobe and look for something else. But now maybe it was not a wrong thing to have bought it.
“It’s clear from this article that Adobe is still deeply committed to the Mac platform.”
Agree, however I would not go as far as saying “deeply committed”. Like any other company Adobe is out to make $money$ and unfortunetely [user base, competive hardware and software prices et al] the grass is greener on the Wintel side.
Adobe is not committed to Apple as they used to be, as the withdraw of a recent movie making software proves.
Still I believe Adobe has hoped for a long time that Apple will get their act together but unfortunetaly this has not hapened, Apple will burn both costumers and developers to make “progress?”, which perpetuates the ‘keep your distance from Apple cuz they are still in f@rt!ng mode’ attitude. I hope Apple get their act together and offer a better enviroment for 3rd party Software like Adobe and others.
Cheers.
Adobe is not committed to Apple as they used to be, as the withdraw of a recent movie making software proves.
This doesn’t prove anything except Premiere’s inferiority to FCE/FCP.
There was little reason for them to continue supporting Premiere on Mac when no one was buying it.
“There was little reason for them to continue supporting Premiere on Mac when no one was buying it.”
Er, you just prove my point: if Mac users don’t buy Adobe products[i.e. primiere, etc.] or not enough of them, Adobe still needs to make $money$ so they will drop support for the Mac App and continue to get revenue out of the Wintel pastures. Nothing personal, a company needs to make money and move on to markets that are fertile while abandoning unfertile [in this case Apple] ground. Is not a statement as to Apple or Wintel being better, the issue is profitability for Adobe and others. Thats all.
Cheers.
“Agree, however I would not go as far as saying “deeply committed”. Like any other company Adobe is out to make $money$ and unfortunetely [user base, competive hardware and software prices et al] the grass is greener on the Wintel side.”
Perhaps… but not by much. Don’t think that because Windows has a larger installed base that software sales in the markets Adobe competes in are the same. For Appleications like Photoshop, Illustrator etc… the difference is negligable. The Mac’s install base is MORE than healthy enough for a company like adobe.
Adobe is not committed to Apple as they used to be, as the withdraw of a recent movie making software proves.”
The reason Adobe pulled Premiere is not because they’re less comited to the Mac, but because Final Cut took all their market share away. Adobe is just as commited to the Mac as before… *very comitted*
“Still I believe Adobe has hoped for a long time that Apple will get their act together”
Oh please… Apple’s “act” is very much together.
“but unfortunetaly this has not hapened,”
Apple cleaned up its problems a long time ago. Any new ones that pop up are no different than those that come up for any fortune 500 company.
“Apple will burn both costumers and developers to make “progress?””
Stop trolling.
Apple has made some unpopular business decisions, but that does not mean that they’re out to burn consumers or developers.
“I hope Apple get their act together and offer a better enviroment for 3rd party Software like Adobe and others.”
No need to wait. Its already here.
“Er, you just prove my point: if Mac users don’t buy Adobe products[i.e. primiere, etc.] or not enough of them, Adobe still needs to make $money$ so they will drop support for the Mac App and continue to get revenue out of the Wintel pastures.”
Adobe has to make applications that are worthy of Mac users money. Mac users didn;t buy Premiere because Adobe wasn’t makeing a quality application, nor were they taking advantage of Apple technologies that would have really made their software fly (i.e. altivec). Apple saw Adobe’s failings on the Mac market, and decided to pick up the slack.
“Nothing personal, a company needs to make money and move on to markets that are fertile while abandoning unfertile [in this case Apple] ground.”
They need to make software worth paying for first before they’ll get Mac users money.
“Is not a statement as to Apple or Wintel being better, the issue is profitability for Adobe and others. Thats all.”
A company needs to make quality product for it to show profit. Adobe’s Premiere was not a quality application on the Mac… and Adobe payed dearly because of it.
Quéru,
You raise an interesting point, and one to which I wish I knew the answer. You state that Apple “will burn both customers and developers to make ‘progress’ “, but this doesn’t appear so clear cut to me in the case of FCP vs. Premiere. I’ve never used either one, so I can’t judge them on their relative merits, but reviewers and user comments seem to indicate that FCP is the superior product. Should Apple then cede the field and withdraw the superior product in order to placate Adobe? Should they then abandon development of the rumored office suite and give Microsoft free rein with Office?
The case of Sherlock vs. Watson seems more clear cut, in that Apple released a less capable application (Sherlock), in order to compete directly with, and perhaps kill off, Watson, but the point I’m getting to is, how does Apple strike a balance between producing their own applications and not alienating third-party developers? Should they abandon application development entirely and concentrate on the OS alone? Then would we have seen software as striking as the iApps and Safari, and yes, Final Cut Pro?
I personally like to see a choice of quality software, and as you say it’s a question of economics, especially for small developers who feel the squeeze the hardest, but can Apple afford to depend completely on others to develop core applications for OS X? Can someone smarter than I am answer these questions?
“I personally like to see a choice of quality software, and as you say it’s a question of economics, especially for small developers who feel the squeeze the hardest, but can Apple afford to depend completely on others to develop core applications for OS X?”
I agree. Its what we all want. However we can’t say that Apple must do things themselves because everyone is inferior, we can sugar coat a Monopolistic greed. I don’t like M$ and I do not want Apple to go down that path.
Unfortunetely, look at what they did to resellers? Jolting the user base is no way to progress. The excuses that the PR gives for these actions are so lame that offend the intelligent user base. We are not blind we want Apple to foster quality software but to do that, it must provide a stable enviroment for developers and resller, so far it has not done that. Granted from an end user perspective maybe all the Apple changes, from Macos to OSX, G3 to G5, seem good, but it has been reckless with “some” developers, specially mid-ware.
M$ is greedy and monopolistic, but they can afford to be, Apple can’t. Is like a kitten imitating the big cats. Apple can make it, but they need to be more ethical and less “self-centered”. I mean, when a developer folds, Apple reaction is: we did not need them anyway they were subpar. Such snob attitude is self delusional and ensures a future failure.
Apple *must* foster better relations and support with developers and the user base. The Ipod, Adobe Primiere, Resellers, etc are all too many recent examples of Apple burning consumers and developers.
Is Apple set out to burn them? I don’t know but intention doesn’t matter when the end result is the same, if they did not want to, they are still doing it. So it does not help.
I wish Apple the best, though I do not fancy myself as an apologist for them. Blind compliance and fact spining only hurts Apple in the long run, we all have seen this in Sillicon Valley time and time again.
Cheers.
I agree. Its what we all want. However we can’t say that Apple must do things themselves because everyone is inferior, we can sugar coat a Monopolistic greed. I don’t like M$ and I do not want Apple to go down that path.
They haven’t. They saw an existing company, already taking marketshare off Adobe Premeir so they thought, “why not add it to our portfolio so that we’re not as reliant on hardware sales”.
What you were stating is that magically overnight by Apple buying FCP, the Premier marketshare died over night. Premier would have been withdrawn even if Apple decided not to buy it. Adobe was making no money from it so why waste proping up a dead product?
The fact remains that they are continuing to develop products for Apple. Using your logic Adobe would simply give up now because Quark has a 80% marketshare. Adobe doesn’t see it that way, they see large numbers of disgruntled Quark 6 victims looking for an alternative product. If the Apple market was so bad, why then would they spend all the money on IMPROVING their professional line of products?
Unfortunetely, look at what they did to resellers? Jolting the user base is no way to progress. The excuses that the PR gives for these actions are so lame that offend the intelligent user base. We are not blind we want Apple to foster quality software but to do that, it must provide a stable enviroment for developers and resller, so far it has not done that. Granted from an end user perspective maybe all the Apple changes, from Macos to OSX, G3 to G5, seem good, but it has been reckless with “some” developers, specially mid-ware.
Why does Apple even have a reselling network at all? why don’t they simply buy out the existing resellers and rebrand them Apple stores? I’ve said this a number of times to other Apple people. If Apple can provide a one-stop-shop for the end users needs, covering repairs, software and hardware, they will find their market share will increase.
M$ is greedy and monopolistic, but they can afford to be, Apple can’t. Is like a kitten imitating the big cats. Apple can make it, but they need to be more ethical and less “self-centered”. I mean, when a developer folds, Apple reaction is: we did not need them anyway they were subpar. Such snob attitude is self delusional and ensures a future failure.
They were subpar. What do you want Apple to do? write a sh*t house quality application simply to make the third party vendors products look good? Heck, why don’t you just whine about Filemaker competing against 4D or Safari competing with Opera.
Apple *must* foster better relations and support with developers and the user base. The Ipod, Adobe Primiere, Resellers, etc are all too many recent examples of Apple burning consumers and developers.
Funny, and I don’t see customers say, “bloody hell I hate this really good mp3 player, I wish I had one of those cheap-ass inferior, flash storage based Diamond Mp3 player” or, “boy, I really hate the fact that Apple has spent the time making FCP, it is such a great product. I want my poor quality, crash prone Promier back!”.
Suck in your bottom lip and accept it. Adobe is the one who dropped the ball with Premier. They left the product sitting in limbo with no updates for too long. They lost market share before Apple bought FCP. Handle it, and move on.
The only message it sends to third parties; if you drop the ball and are beaten by another player, we just might decide buying your competitor.
>When I was buying photoshop elements (I know they don’t care
>much about my $50 or so), I was actually thinking of
>boycotting Adobe and look for something else. But now maybe
>it was not a wrong thing to have bought it.
Maybe that was the whole purpose of his comment but that still
does not convince me that he was speaking the truth.
Apple should be taking over the business of smaller 3rd party developers. Making browsers and AIM clients and shipping them with the OS should be a good thing. The 3rd party developers are very talented and should be putting that talent and creativity to better use. I have counted 23 AIM clients for OS X. There’s no need for all that. This also makes it Apples responsibility to make their own bundled applications at least as good as the 3rd party versions. And for the higher end line (Final Cut area) there is no reason for Apple not to compete. When a product costs $1000 people won’t buy it simply because of the maker, they buy it because it’s better than the others guys software. If Premiere was a better application than Final Cut, it would’ve stayed right where it was. But it wasn’t as good. Adobe had the same access to OS X’s technologies as Apple did, and Adobe had plenty of talent in developing for the Mac platform, but with Premiere they really blew it.
Microsoft should also be bundling the smaller applications with their OS. It makes a complete OS. The problem with them arises when you take into account their marketshare. Being the largest player by such a margin puts them in a position of great responsibility whether they like it or not. It is their responsibility to keep their own software at least on par with other peoples. It is also their responsibity to support recognized standards. Apple does this. Linux does this. Unfortunately Microsoft does not. Having as much influence as they do truely does make the average user not know their is another option. If Apple or Linux were in the position Microsft/Windows is in, they would not be accused of the same practices as Microsoft because they support recognized standards, and they keep their products at least on par with 3rd party products.
adobe does not want to take sides. they don’t want to piss off apple or ms or linux or anyone else. they just want to sell product. pissing people off and selling product don’t mix.
if apple reads a comment like that then, knowing apple, jobs is likely to duplicate the entire adobe product line and probably do a better job than adobe. would you want that if you were adobe. do you want to scare apple into thinking they’ll lost support from adobe? Does adobe want to be put out of business. look how well adobe does against final cut pro….not that well.
“Er, you just prove my point: if Mac users don’t buy Adobe products[i.e. primiere, etc.] or not enough of them, Adobe still needs to make $money$ so they will drop support for the Mac App and continue to get revenue out of the Wintel pastures. Nothing personal, a company needs to make money and move on to markets that are fertile while abandoning unfertile [in this case Apple] ground. Is not a statement as to Apple or Wintel being better, the issue is profitability for Adobe and others. Thats all. ”
The mac version of Premiere 6.5 was horrible and wasn’t ported well to Mac OS X. If Adobe would of did a better job of it, I’m sure other mac users would of keep the app around. Consumers make the choice based on the products performance. So lay it back on Adobe,,,,,they need to support the mac version better. Hopefully Adobe has it’s act together now.
” To be honest, I’m quite cool, not truly irrate, just tired of conversations such as this, in which we see Apple do something silly and then being vigorously defended by users, who a) Don’t know what they are talking about, or b) As you so wonderfully put it, don’t ‘contemplate reality’ ”
Read the article again. This is not really about Apple and Apple hasn’t done anything, its about Adobe and its Adobe thats retracted their statement.
I also have a hard time believing your statements on your friends G4.
Almost all G4 systems last year shipped with at least a combo drive.
The small fortune he spent on speakers could have been spent on any PC system, whats the point other than the Mac seems to be able to put out good sound hence the need for some good speakers.
Then you say that the combo drive that shipped with the G4 doesn’t work with it. Hard to really believe. People even use unsupported drive in their G4s so its hard to believe that Apple shipped a drive that doesn’t work this the OS, its just not believable.
I don’t know what you mean by Apple branded memory. Crucial works just fine. Apple doesn’t make memory.
Then you mention that MacOSX DVD player needs some hacking because it doesn’t like your friends setup too much.
Your comments show that you have never used a MacOSX system before but seem to think that you know all about it. Its FUD that people spread but people see right thourgh it. You don’t know anything about Macs or MacOSX. Its evident in your post.
Some of the points being made here are quite silly. If Apple is alienating 3rd party devs by making competing software that may or may not be considered superior, who cares. Its business. If MS starts making hardware (which they will through agreements), does that mean that Dell should withdraw from the market and be “alienated” in a sense? No. They would only withdraw if they are not making money in that area. As will be with any business. Adobe still generates a large income with Photoshop for OSX so why would they withdraw? They won’t. Same goes for any app. Would you still feel the same way if you considered Apple hardware and Apple Software to be seperate entities?
“Microsoft should also be bundling the smaller applications with their OS. It makes a complete OS. The problem with them arises when you take into account their marketshare. Being the largest player by such a margin puts them in a position of great responsibility whether they like it or not. It is their responsibility to keep their own software at least on par with other peoples.”
Microsoft is the only company that shouldn’t be integrating smaller applications like a browser and media player. Look at it like this… Linux is open source… so its not infringing on anybody. Apple is creating a complete solution (they own the platform) so its not unlike any company (casette player bundling a speaker for example) providing a complete solution to an individual… but Microsoft is a component supplier. They should provide the OS and other software as seperate components.
“To be honest, I’m quite cool, not truly irrate, just tired of conversations such as this, in which we see Apple do something silly and then being vigorously defended by users”
If you see us getting overly defensive… its because you got overly agressive.
“I live with a Mac user (and yes, he is a bit pretentious).”
You mean… like yourself.
“he buys everything that Apple say”
People buy Apple products often times because they have a reputation for quality… noit because they are addicted to the brand as you imply.
“and he brought a G4 last year for almost £1,000UK”
Last year wasn’t these best time to buy a high-end Mac… but you got to do it if you want the fastest performing Mac to run your favorite OS.
“then a small fortune on branded speakers”
And probably no more than the equivilent speaker that wasn’t Apple branded.
“Apple branded memory”
This is the only bad decision I see thus far
“(OSX refused to play with perfectly good generic memory)
Thats not true. OS X uses memory from a multitude of other manufacturers. Apple does require that the ram be of a specific quality calibar however.
“Note that OSX needs a bit more hacking before he can play DVDs apparently (it doesn’t like his setup too much).”
He must have had another unrelated problem. OS X will typically play DVDs without a hitch.
“He’ll swear blind that it’s great value and fast”</i.
And he’d be right.
[i]”and while we can have good, long conversations about it, he falls back to propaganda sometimes.”
This is funny. Are you suggesting that you’re not?
“The simple truth, is that I can build a faster, stable PC for £200.
No. You can’t. You can custom configure a PC with less and therefor pay less. That is a very specific advantage that the PC has over the Mac… but don’t suggest that you can build the same PC spec for spec for that amount. Yes, you can build the same PC, and even do it for less… but absolutely not for the amount you’re claiming.
“I should know… It’s been running my developmental image processing server and workstation in the university lab for a year now.”
You bought less and therefor you payed less.
“Oh, and with respect to prices, to be frank, I’ve ennumerated his areas of expenditure and made the point that my box is in fact faster and 100% reliable, making quality of purchase a non-issue.”
Your machine may in fact be stable. (although we don’t know for sure) but you’re claims that you have the same PC has your friends Mac is not true.
“In twenty years, you’ve got 5% market share (less, in fact… guesstimates put it at about 3.5%)”
Market share is determined quarterly… not multi-yearly. This means you must be referring to the Mac’s User-base…. which is closer to 10-12%. Considering the fact that Apple achieved that while working underneath an illegal monopoly… its pretty remarkable.
“Linux can be seen to have been only to be gaining the desktop market really since Mandrake 8’s era, some three years ago. In that time, Linux on the desktop has overtaken your market share and is continuing to develop.”
Linux’s total user-base is roughly comperable to Apple’s user-base. That does not mean that their desktop user-base is comperable. (as a matter of fact you are very far off in that regard. Secondly… if you are referring to “market share” and Linux than you would have nearly leg to stand on whatsoever, because “market share” is determined solely by quarterly “SALES”. Considering Linux is distributed most often for free… market share hardly even comes into play here.
“We’ve achieved parity”
I like Linux too… but to suggest that it has achieved parity is an overstatement.
“and we’re moving forward”
Linux is moving forward… as are all OSes. Linux is growing faster in some areas… as are other OSes.
“with new features”
dito
“better ease of use”
dito again
“and scalability from embedded chipsets, PDAs and phones up to mainframes.”
dito again, again and again.
“The era of true convergence, driven by Linux and ubiquitous networking through wifi, bluetooth and ethernet is coming soon, I promise you.”
It may be coming to Linux… but its already available, happening and has been happening on the Mac for quite some time.