Adobe launches “We (Heart) Apple” campaign

adobe_ads

In what has been a back and forth argument between Adobe and Apple, over the lack of Flash in the iPod touch, iPad, and iPhone, has taken a different twist this morning.

Over at Engadget, Adobe has launched a “We (Heart) Apple” campaign with webpage ads, and even a full-page advertisement in today's copy of Washington Post.  The campaign also contains a second message, “What we don't love is anybody taking away your freedom to choose what you create, how you create it, and what you experience on the web.”

During the heated battle between to two, Steve Jobs posted his “thoughts on flash”, stating reasons behind Apple not supporting Flash.  Apple's lack of Flash support on any ‘iproducts' has forced Apple to embrace HTML5 as a standard on their device.

Adobe has responded to Apple - you can read the whole thing here - but here are the major points:

  • It was Adobe who supported Apple in the beginning. 
  • Mac users don't buy half of Adobe's Creative Suite products, Creative Suite users purchase Macs as their platform of choice. If Adobe dropped Mac support, Apple would sell far less computers.
  • Creating a browser that supports open standards is not the same thing as "creating open standards."
  • iProducts are missing out on plenty of video content, to say otherwise is simply untrue.
  • Not supporting Flash because of its past inability to handle H.264 is wrong.

Stuck in the middle of the battle between Adobe and Apple is the consumer, who is the only party suffering.  Apple seems to believe that they know exactly what customers want but Adobe has continued this fight and for good reason. 

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Skype drops development for Windows Phone 7

Next Story

Microsoft announces new MSN mobile homepage

229 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Yes I do know Steve is married...to another narcissistic loser...lol. STEVE the clock is ticking old man....just a few more ticks on the clock and Apple will finally rot out of existence.

If adobe would fix there stuff then apple would not say what they do and please release a 64bit version of flash for the users who need it as there are more 64bit users around now and you adobe have had more than enough time to test/create a 64bit flash build, if you don't want to die a meaninless death then just do it.

I feel that Adobe is making a mistake consistently trying to 'prove' itself. The tech industry knows where it's position lies, and with these advertisements it makes them look week, scared. The first statement was enough. It made headlines and they got their point across. This is just nonsense.

As for flash on a mac. I've personally never had a 'crash' or any other problems with flash on my device. I only watch videos on youtube.com (no other sources) or I'll watch silverlight videos from netflix.

But, this debate has always been about mobile applications. I personally see no reason for flash on a mobile device, as I stated in an earlier post they only thing you miss out on is games. Because I for one, do not want to view hulu in a web app, but as an application from the store. I want to deal with it natively like tv.com.

Does it suck they want it closed down, I suppose. But flash was never on a mobile device (reliable version, I know windows 6.5 had flash 9 but it never worked) before so I don't really see the problem. Apparently the next iteration of Android will have it. And once we get it, then we shall see what we are really missing. I sure do hope I don't get pop-ups on my phone

SaltLife said,

isn't that illegal?


right, setting your own products' price is illegal, but blocking competition isn't?

If Adobe really gave a damn about openess it would reflect in their entire operation and as a result crap like Adobe Digital Editions wouldn't exist. Anyone here that has ever purchased an Adobe Format eBook knows that openess is only a priority to Adobe when they afe out of the loop. I bought an eBook yesterday and I'm only able to download it using an Adobe ID and read it in their sh1tty application...how open is that? Screw Adobe and their crappy software...they can go away with their whining. Flash runs like absolute crap on my late 2009 iMac so I can see why Apple takes the stance it does against such a pitiful corporation.

MarenLBC said,
If Adobe really gave a damn about openess it would reflect in their entire operation and as a result crap like Adobe Digital Editions wouldn't exist. Anyone here that has ever purchased an Adobe Format eBook knows that openess is only a priority to Adobe when they afe out of the loop. I bought an eBook yesterday and I'm only able to download it using an Adobe ID and read it in their sh1tty application...how open is that? Screw Adobe and their crappy software...they can go away with their whining. Flash runs like absolute crap on my late 2009 iMac so I can see why Apple takes the stance it does against such a pitiful corporation.

That is because you imac is crap. Flash runs perfectly on my 1.86 GHz core2 duo tablet pc. I can watch two 1080p movies streamed in flash, simultaneously.

zagor said,

That is because you imac is crap. Flash runs perfectly on my 1.86 GHz core2 duo tablet pc. I can watch two 1080p movies streamed in flash, simultaneously.

+1 . Sorry to hear that the iMac can't even handle flash in this day and age. How crappy is that for your $2000 machine. Lol.

neoxphuse said,

+1 . Sorry to hear that the iMac can't even handle flash in this day and age. How crappy is that for your $2000 machine. Lol.

Yet it can handle everything else he throws at it. Sounds like a problem with Flash. I am sure that I could cook up a ****ty app in C# that would perform sluggishly and crash often, even on the said 1.86 GHz C2D mentioned above.

zagor said,

That is because you imac is crap. Flash runs perfectly on my 1.86 GHz core2 duo tablet pc. I can watch two 1080p movies streamed in flash, simultaneously.

No, it is because you know nothing about programming. By the way if the iMac is crap I wouldn't want to know what you think about its plastic clad Windows Based counterparts.

Edited by MarenLBC, May 13 2010, 11:52pm :

MarenLBC said,

No, it is because you know nothing about programming. By the way if the iMac is crap I wouldn't want to know what you think about its plastic clad Windows Based counterparts.


you obviously conveniently ignore the whole 27" imac saga (just to give you an example). you should check what's available out there. There are PCs that are of similar or better quality than an imac.

Edited by zagor, May 14 2010, 12:50am :

MarenLBC said,

No, it is because you know nothing about programming. By the way if the iMac is crap I wouldn't want to know what you think about its plastic clad Windows Based counterparts.


I have been programming for the last 7 years.

zagor said,

you obviously conveniently ignore the whole 27" imac saga (just to give you an example). you should check what's available out there. There are PCs that are of similar or better quality than an imac.

Not in regards to quality, size, service, reliability, and style. In addition, neither of the alternatives come with Mac OS X which is a major selling point. You can also use boot camp and install Windows 7 on a Mac so it is easily the most versatile solution.

MarenLBC said,

I have been an astronaut for the past 10...see how easy that was?


if jumpin up an down makes you an astronaut, yes, I believe you are one.

MarenLBC said,

Not in regards to quality, size, service, reliability, and style. In addition, neither of the alternatives come with Mac OS X which is a major selling point. You can also use boot camp and install Windows 7 on a Mac so it is easily the most versatile solution.

quality:low grade parts that can be found in cheaper windows prebuilts
size:looks like the same size as any PC to me? am i missing something here?
service:prebuilt pc manufcaturers have very good service from what i hear, stores like bestbuy or future shop have all the services of the apple store and they cost less.
reliability: from people i know that own both or use a windows pc and a mac, they tell me the windows pcs crash less, and have less problems.
style: i doubt you've seen my custom built pc, all black, even the inside is black and nice window to show off what's under the hood along with some not too overstated LED lights on the fans.

Wierd really I bet most of the people making comments on this story don't use macs or iPhones and yet are the most bothered about the situation.

evo_spook said,
Wierd really I bet most of the people making comments on this story don't use macs or iPhones and yet are the most bothered about the situation.

Whether you own a Apple product or not, does not make any difference. If Apple has their way, this can end up hurting the whole Tech Community, not just Apple consumers.

evo_spook said,
Wierd really I bet most of the people making comments on this story don't use macs or iPhones and yet are the most bothered about the situation.

They haven't had to put up with Flash on the Mac, that's for sure. Just yesterday, I had Steam for Mac crash on me while viewing a trailer. The crash report said that the Flash Player plugin faulted.

NeoTrunks said,

They haven't had to put up with Flash on the Mac, that's for sure. Just yesterday, I had Steam for Mac crash on me while viewing a trailer. The crash report said that the Flash Player plugin faulted.

Blame apple for not sharing the API's. PC's don't have nearly half the problems you MAC guys report.

shakey said,

Blame apple for not sharing the API's. PC's don't have nearly half the problems you MAC guys report.

And for how long has Flash player actually used the hardware APIs? Was it not just introduced in 10.1, which is not even final?

NeoTrunks said,

And for how long has Flash player actually used the hardware APIs? Was it not just introduced in 10.1, which is not even final?

Yup, they just finally got a hold of the API's, which in turn will bring about a better experience with using Flash on Macs. It will take time, but Flash will work on Apple products, they just have to be given the correct information to make that happen.

shakey said,

Yup, they just finally got a hold of the API's, which in turn will bring about a better experience with using Flash on Macs. It will take time, but Flash will work on Apple products, they just have to be given the correct information to make that happen.

What I mean was, Flash did not use the hardware APIs on any platform before 10.1. At least this is what I thought. There were significant improvements to the Windows version with 10.1, but those improvements did not make it to Flash for Mac until the last month or so (or at all for Linux, for that matter). Yet, as far as video playback goes, we Mac users haven't had these problems with Silverlight.

evo_spook said,
Wierd really I bet most of the people making comments on this story don't use macs or iPhones and yet are the most bothered about the situation.

I have an iphone, ipad, macbook pro. And I care for this discussion. Caus unlike most brainwashed apple customers, I want to access hulu on my device. I want to be able access what's available on the web. I paid for these devices and I should be able to access everything I want. Don't try to give me the dumbest argument, " you knew what you were getting".

zagor said,

I have an iphone, ipad, macbook pro. And I care for this discussion. Caus unlike most brainwashed apple customers, I want to access hulu on my device. I want to be able access what's available on the web. I paid for these devices and I should be able to access everything I want. Don't try to give me the dumbest argument, " you knew what you were getting".

is there a device that works with hulu now? I can't even get hulu to work on my PS3 without major workarounds. The only time hulu worked was back on windows 6.5 running skyfire. And that was before hulu shut that off (when the arrangement between MS and them started).

I wouldn't even want hulu to work as a website, but rather an app. like tv.com. Same as how netflix is now coming.

NeoTrunks said,

What I mean was, Flash did not use the hardware APIs on any platform before 10.1. At least this is what I thought. There were significant improvements to the Windows version with 10.1, but those improvements did not make it to Flash for Mac until the last month or so (or at all for Linux, for that matter). Yet, as far as video playback goes, we Mac users haven't had these problems with Silverlight.

True, they used enabled it for PC, but PC rarely had the issues OSX did, and apple was still holding those API's "ransom" for quite some time. But if there was an issue with flash and performance, like what OSX was getting, and it being related to Flash, then all OS's would have it, not just 1. There is still stuff in OSX that does not work well with flash, and that is something that jobs needs to address.

shakey said,

True, they used enabled it for PC, but PC rarely had the issues OSX did, and apple was still holding those API's "ransom" for quite some time. But if there was an issue with flash and performance, like what OSX was getting, and it being related to Flash, then all OS's would have it, not just 1. There is still stuff in OSX that does not work well with flash, and that is something that jobs needs to address.

I don't agree that all OS's would have this issue. As each is coded specifically for their platform. And from what I recall, flash still sucks on linux too. But that is usually driver related. As that should not be a problem for OS X, I don't understand why everyone has so many problems. Again, I've never had a single issue with flash on my mac, the only time I've ever come across a problem is if I right click the window (to see if it's flash or not) and it pauses. But, nothing other than that.

SaltLife said,

is there a device that works with hulu now? I can't even get hulu to work on my PS3 without major workarounds. The only time hulu worked was back on windows 6.5 running skyfire. And that was before hulu shut that off (when the arrangement between MS and them started).

I wouldn't even want hulu to work as a website, but rather an app. like tv.com. Same as how netflix is now coming.


yes. A netbook, you know, what Ipad aspires to kill, what Ipad is claimed to do everything better from.

SaltLife said,
I don't agree that all OS's would have this issue. As each is coded specifically for their platform. And from what I recall, flash still sucks on linux too. But that is usually driver related. As that should not be a problem for OS X, I don't understand why everyone has so many problems. Again, I've never had a single issue with flash on my mac, the only time I've ever come across a problem is if I right click the window (to see if it's flash or not) and it pauses. But, nothing other than that.

Not only driver but the fact that targeting Linux is like trying to paint the Mona Lisa on the belly of a belly dancer whilst dancing. Until Linux stabilises its ABI and API, and provides better drivers it'll always suck. In the case of Mac OS X, Until they actually fix the structure performance problems with Mac OS X, things aren't going to improve. All evidence shows that Steve Jobs would sooner get another ivory back scratcher than hire another much needed 100 full time programmers for Mac OS X.

SaltLife said,

is there a device that works with hulu now? I can't even get hulu to work on my PS3 without major workarounds. The only time hulu worked was back on windows 6.5 running skyfire. And that was before hulu shut that off (when the arrangement between MS and them started).

I wouldn't even want hulu to work as a website, but rather an app. like tv.com. Same as how netflix is now coming.

You want Hulu Desktop: http://www.hulu.com/labs/hulu-desktop

Edited by Eric, May 14 2010, 2:56pm :

dhavalhirdhav said,
Adobe file monopoly lawsuite.. goto EU and end the matter.

That one is to easy. Apple would counter file with a monopoly stating that in order to play Flash files, you have to have Adobes Flash player. In order to make Flash files, you have to have Adobes Flash developing software or another piece of software that had to pay Flash for using it. While they are at it, they can sue Microsoft for not making a fully supported version of Silverlight that works on the iPhone. Or how bout Google for not making Android fully functional on an iPhone? It's a dumb lawsuit that would have way to many implications. Maybe Microsoft should sue Sony for the games that are only on PS3 and vice versa?

dhavalhirdhav said,
Adobe file monopoly lawsuite.. goto EU and end the matter.

Exactly what I was thinking. I would like to see Opera go to EU trade comission (or whatever they call themselves) and file anti-trust complaint just like they did to Microsoft. Why can Apple have their Safari web browser as default, whereas Microsoft needs to include Ballot Screen?

Tolanri said,

Exactly what I was thinking. I would like to see Opera go to EU trade comission (or whatever they call themselves) and file anti-trust complaint just like they did to Microsoft. Why can Apple have their Safari web browser as default, whereas Microsoft needs to include Ballot Screen?

Because Safari is only like 4% browser market and Firefox doesn't have an operating system to blame.

SputnikGamer said,

That one is to easy. Apple would counter file with a monopoly stating that in order to play Flash files, you have to have Adobes Flash player. In order to make Flash files, you have to have Adobes Flash developing software or another piece of software that had to pay Flash for using it. While they are at it, they can sue Microsoft for not making a fully supported version of Silverlight that works on the iPhone. Or how bout Google for not making Android fully functional on an iPhone? It's a dumb lawsuit that would have way to many implications. Maybe Microsoft should sue Sony for the games that are only on PS3 and vice versa?


That wouldn't work. There is nothing keeping another company from making a flash player.

zagor said,

That wouldn't work. There is nothing keeping another company from making a flash player.

Adobe says that but have you never wondered why NOBODY has ever done it? Especially with companies like Apple, Google and Microsoft around that claim they can do everything better than everyone else. Adobes Flash player does not run on any computer in a way that could be deemed acceptable. I was at work yesterday and was messing around the the HTML5 version of Youtube and comparing it to the Flash version. I watched my Ram and CPU meters when viewing the video in both versions. Flash version when from 20% of ram being used to 30% of my 8gig of ram and my CPU went from 32% to 55%. The HTML5 version went from 20% to 22% of the ram and went from 32% to 36%. This is a OEM machine with no modifications done to it all and I am suppose to believe that there is nothing wrong with the Flash player? That is on a PC and not a Mac and on a Mac it is worse.

SputnikGamer said,
Adobe says that but have you never wondered why NOBODY has ever done it? Especially with companies like Apple, Google and Microsoft around that claim they can do everything better than everyone else. Adobes Flash player does not run on any computer in a way that could be deemed acceptable. I was at work yesterday and was messing around the the HTML5 version of Youtube and comparing it to the Flash version. I watched my Ram and CPU meters when viewing the video in both versions. Flash version when from 20% of ram being used to 30% of my 8gig of ram and my CPU went from 32% to 55%. The HTML5 version went from 20% to 22% of the ram and went from 32% to 36%. This is a OEM machine with no modifications done to it all and I am suppose to believe that there is nothing wrong with the Flash player? That is on a PC and not a Mac and on a Mac it is worse.

They don't do it because it is a lot easier to bad mouth the competition that build a better Flash player. Btw, Microsoft works with Adobe to improve Flash performance whilst offering their superior alternative called Silverlight. Google works with Adobe to improve Flash by co-operating with 'Open Screen Project' resulting in Chrome now being shipped by default with Flash 10.1 RC and Flash being optimised for Android. The only organisation so far who has refused to work with Adobe is Apple.

rawr_boy81 said,
The only organisation so far who has refused to work with Adobe is Apple.

That statement alone tells everyone who pays attention to the news articles by actually reading them that you don't read them. Apple and Adobe have both, multiple times, stated they have been working together to resolve the issues.

SputnikGamer said,

Because Safari is only like 4% browser market and Firefox doesn't have an operating system to blame.

Because you can uninstall Safari, Firefox, Chrome... but you can't uninstall IE.

SputnikGamer said,
That statement alone tells everyone who pays attention to the news articles by actually reading them that you don't read them. Apple and Adobe have both, multiple times, stated they have been working together to resolve the issues.

You are correct, I've just had a look up regarding NPAPI Pepper and assumed that was an exclusively Google enterprise but having read here:

http://www.google.com/buzz/gar...ogle-Native-Client-includes

It appears that there is more work being done behind the scenes; it is difficult to gage how much 'working together' other than for public appearance that Adobe and Apple do given their lack of specifics. How many times have you heard companies claim they're working together with the engineers at the bottom saying, "we've never met our counterparts in the other organisation"?

Elliott said,
I'm pretty sure Adobe didn't care about open markets before they got locked out of a market.

Adobe is basically the king of the market.... the only thing they are locked out of are apple products, and thats more at the loss to the customer than adobe...

shakey said,

Adobe is basically the king of the market.... the only thing they are locked out of are apple products, and thats more at the loss to the customer than adobe...

Maybe I know nothing about business but how many million iPads, iPhones, and iPods are in the hands of customers? You are telling us that each individual iDevice owner by themselves is at more of a loss than Adobe.... Millions of potential customers is less of a loss than one persons ability to use a Flash fart app?

SputnikGamer said,

Maybe I know nothing about business but how many million iPads, iPhones, and iPods are in the hands of customers? You are telling us that each individual iDevice owner by themselves is at more of a loss than Adobe.... Millions of potential customers is less of a loss than one persons ability to use a Flash fart app?

Not that many if you compare the statistics. It's why apple has yet to be hit with any antitrust suites; they are still not a big enough player ( so the law says ). But yes, all those people who have apple products, they are the ones losing out. Most people who have apple products aslo, are the type who have rebought said devices over and over. Just because millions of something sold, does not always mean that millions of people have it, sometimes it just means that a lot of units were sold to some people.
Adobe would sure be hurt a little, but they have PC's bigger market to make money from. And I'm sure a lot of apple consumers would turn to PC's when they see what is able to be done on one compared to what the Mac wouldn't be able to do....

shakey said,
And I'm sure a lot of apple consumers would turn to PC's when they see what is able to be done on one compared to what the Mac wouldn't be able to do....

Such as? You can install windows and linux on a Mac and use pc hardware to upgrade them now also so I am not sure what you are getting at? You can technically do more on a mac pc than you can on a regular pc since most regular pc's don't have the driver support to run OSX. That means a Mac PC can do anything that you can do on Linux, Windows, and PC while a regular PC can only do things in Windows and Linux. You statement that PC's can do more is factually incorrect.

Elliott said,
I'm pretty sure Adobe didn't care about open markets before they got locked out of a market.

Do you have anything to back your claim? Did adobe try to block silverlight? Do they even in a position to care for open market? They do not have the power to tell the customers which software to run on their devices. They only have the means to compete.

Edited by zagor, May 13 2010, 9:53pm :

SputnikGamer said,

Such as? You can install windows and linux on a Mac and use pc hardware to upgrade them now also so I am not sure what you are getting at? You can technically do more on a mac pc than you can on a regular pc since most regular pc's don't have the driver support to run OSX. That means a Mac PC can do anything that you can do on Linux, Windows, and PC while a regular PC can only do things in Windows and Linux. You statement that PC's can do more is factually incorrect.

That is only because Apple doesn't support OS X on anything but a Mac and attempts to prevent you from installing it on a regular PC. If I designed a closed PC that allowed installation of Windows and Linux along with its own custom OS (but could not have its OS installed on anything else), you could argue that it could do more because it could run that third OS there and any applications that ran on it. But to say that it's somehow superior for that reason would be ridiculous.

Silverskull said,
That is only because Apple doesn't support OS X on anything but a Mac and attempts to prevent you from installing it on a regular PC. If I designed a closed PC that allowed installation of Windows and Linux along with its own custom OS (but could not have its OS installed on anything else), you could argue that it could do more because it could run that third OS there and any applications that ran on it. But to say that it's somehow superior for that reason would be ridiculous.

Silver, sputnik is just grasping for straws at this point in all his arguments. I've given up trying to debate logically with him. Apparently Apple is better because they lock everyone out of what they want...

shakey said,

Silver, sputnik is just grasping for straws at this point in all his arguments. I've given up trying to debate logically with him. Apparently Apple is better because they lock everyone out of what they want...

That is exactly what is happening! Your argument is that limiting the choice of PC users to only Windows and Linux is good while it is evil that Apple doesn't allow Flash on all its hardware. You sir, are a hypocrite that fail to see your own fallacy in logic.

Silverskull said,
That is only because Apple doesn't support OS X on anything but a Mac and attempts to prevent you from installing it on a regular PC. If I designed a closed PC that allowed installation of Windows and Linux along with its own custom OS (but could not have its OS installed on anything else), you could argue that it could do more because it could run that third OS there and any applications that ran on it. But to say that it's somehow superior for that reason would be ridiculous.

It makes it superior in one and only one way. You have the choice to use any OS you please on a Mac. You don't have the choice on a PC.

SputnikGamer said,

It makes it superior in one and only one way. You have the choice to use any OS you please on a Mac. You don't have the choice on a PC.


LOL...so, why exactly, I can not use OS X on a PC? Care to explain the reason?

zagor said,

LOL...so, why exactly, I can not use OS X on a PC? Care to explain the reason?

Driver support isnt there because hardware manufactors dont make drivers for all their hardware to run on a Mac.

SputnikGamer said,

Driver support isnt there because hardware manufactors dont make drivers for all their hardware to run on a Mac.

and it has nothing to do with the fact that apple does everything in it's power to block people from installing OSX on non apple built computers? including suing companies that do this for less savvy users?
fact is, it's illegal to install OSX on a non mac PC. there is no installer package to do this with made by apple, you have to pirate the software or clone it from a apple built computer with OSX preinstalled, you have to use certain hacks to make it work, and it remains unsupported by Apple itself.
this is why hardware manufacturers do not make drivers for hardware which is not endorsed or used to make macs. they would likely open themselves to litigation by apple.
although i doubt there is anything stopping enthusiast driver writers from supporting hackintoshes, i don't know of anyone stepping up to the plate there.

treemonster said,

and it has nothing to do with the fact that apple does everything in it's power to block people from installing OSX on non apple built computers? including suing companies that do this for less savvy users?
fact is, it's illegal to install OSX on a non mac PC. there is no installer package to do this with made by apple, you have to pirate the software or clone it from a apple built computer with OSX preinstalled, you have to use certain hacks to make it work, and it remains unsupported by Apple itself.
this is why hardware manufacturers do not make drivers for hardware which is not endorsed or used to make macs. they would likely open themselves to litigation by apple.
although i doubt there is anything stopping enthusiast driver writers from supporting hackintoshes, i don't know of anyone stepping up to the plate there.

EULA does not equal law. There are plenty of ways to install OSX on a PC without hacking the software which Apple can't legally do anything about.

3lixir said,
The only people who will suffer are mac buyers, so it's not really much of an issue...

Um no? This has to do with iPhones, iPods, and iPads. Wasn't a statistic recently posted that said either most or at least half of the people that use iDevices use PCs?

Adobe! Please release Flash for jailbroken iPhones! I don't understand why this hasn't happened! Heck, jailbroken iPhones can run windows 95 with a little work!! Where's is Flash?

PS. I know, iPhone doesn't have virtual memory management. Still, Flash never crashed any mac. Sure it crashes the browser, but the browser starts right back up. Big deal. Give us Flash.

medium_pimpin said,
I agree with several of the above points. No CS on MacOS, Apple would sell a LOT fewer Macs.

And Adobe would go out of business since half of its sells go to Macs with little to no effect on Apples iDevice lines

SputnikGamer said,

And Adobe would go out of business since half of its sells go to Macs with little to no effect on Apples iDevice lines

Not necessarily... If you look at CS3/CS4/CS5... they run pretty much the same on both osx and windows... as long as you have a nicely built system (most higher-end pcs are WAYYY more affordable than Macs)... I had all those versions on macs and lower-end and higher-end PCs, and they run pretty much the same now. Since most of them already have PCs, it would save their customers money instead of having to go buy macs... but if they have a mac already.. well.. lol.. they're on the loser side anyway

Edited by j2006, May 13 2010, 8:10pm :

j2006 said,

Not necessarily... If you look at CS3/CS4/CS5... they run pretty much the same on both osx and windows... as long as you have a nicely built system (most higher-end pcs are WAYYY more affordable than Macs)... I had all those versions on macs and lower-end and higher-end PCs, and they run pretty much the same now. Since most of them already have PCs, it would save their customers money instead of having to go buy macs... but if they have a mac already.. well.. lol.. they're on the loser side anyway

While that is certainly true, most of the comments here are drop Mac support right now. CS3/CS4/CS5 are all being used because of how fast they are coming out. The people with Mac's will continue using Macs because they already have the software they need. No reason to spend 2k every year just because Adobe keeps pushing out minimal feature upgrades. Overall Adobe is just coming out with crap software.

medium_pimpin said,
I agree with several of the above points. No CS on MacOS, Apple would sell a LOT fewer Macs.

This is completely out-of-my-ass (what opinion isn't on this board), but I don't think Apple makes the majority of its revenue from Macs. I think that their success in the past decade has been driven by iPod and iPhone sells.

What Apple is doing with iPhone and Flash is completely stupid. Clearly they do have issues..

Adobe should completely drop supporting Apple. And I mean immediately.

nMIK-3 said,
What Apple is doing with iPhone and Flash is completely stupid. Clearly they do have issues..

Adobe should completely drop supporting Apple. And I mean immediately.

+1

Adobe must stop supporting both Mac and iPhone OS.
Mac sales are extremely limited so it will have very little affect to their profits. Apple is killing flash in iPhone by themselves anyway.

All those happening the same time with Android taking the world by storm..

Adobe has the upper hand right now. Defending themselves is just WRONG.
They need to defend by attacking. Drop support for all Apple products even Flash plug-ins for Mac Browsers. Attack them and them leave Steve the the rest of the Apples running behind Adobe.

Edited by nMIK-3, May 13 2010, 11:15pm :

To thoe who are complaining over the amount of Apple news articles - Microsoft aren't doing anything special right now, so there aren't many articles.

jamesyfx said,
To thoe who are complaining over the amount of Apple news articles - Microsoft aren't doing anything special right now, so there aren't many articles.

+1
Though it would be nice to see MS doing something of note. Not the News Media's fault though for MS lack of activity.

jamesyfx said,
To thoe who are complaining over the amount of Apple news articles - Microsoft aren't doing anything special right now, so there aren't many articles.

+1

Adobe needs to stop playing the blame game. Flash use to work just fine on Apple products back when it was Macromedia. Then Adobe takes over and Dreamweaver and Flash go to hell. Sure the developers side of it is prettier and easier to use, but the end products blow, even for PC standards.

while adobe isn't my favorutie software dev(ffs please update your all but standard web software), it seems to me that alot of mac users buy them for adobe products.
i wonder, can those products be found for windows?
do they run just as well on windows as on OSX?
is there some advantage to using a mac to use those products over using them on a windows pc?
there are few software devs that support the mac. seems like a bad idea for apple to burn bridges with one of their biggest supporters.

treemonster said,
while adobe isn't my favorutie software dev(ffs please update your all but standard web software), it seems to me that alot of mac users buy them for adobe products.
i wonder, can those products be found for windows?
do they run just as well on windows as on OSX?
is there some advantage to using a mac to use those products over using them on a windows pc?
there are few software devs that support the mac. seems like a bad idea for apple to burn bridges with one of their biggest supporters.

The advantage to using a Mac: You can install Windows, Mac osx, and Linux at the same time with little to no troubles, thus allowing you to use software from all three operating systems. The same cannot be said for a normal pc because most hardware companies dont make drivers for Macs. Using a PC limits your options on software. Using a Mac limits your options on hardware.

SputnikGamer said,

The advantage to using a Mac: You can install Windows, Mac osx, and Linux at the same time with little to no troubles, thus allowing you to use software from all three operating systems. The same cannot be said for a normal pc because most hardware companies dont make drivers for Macs. Using a PC limits your options on software. Using a Mac limits your options on hardware.

you can install linux and windows on the same PC. OSX is prebuilt hardware locked. sounds more like a limitation with OSX than PCs. windows supports a huge library of software in every category from a wide variety of companies.
again what kind of software, in particular made by adobe, is available for OSX that isn't available for windows?

treemonster said,

you can install linux and windows on the same PC. OSX is prebuilt hardware locked. sounds more like a limitation with OSX than PCs. windows supports a huge library of software in every category from a wide variety of companies.
again what kind of software, in particular made by adobe, is available for OSX that isn't available for windows?

You just argued my point for me. Macs run all three operating systems and software including the "huge library of software in every category from a wide variety of companies" while PC can only run 2 of the 3. That means any software that is OSX specific cannot run on all PC's. OSX can't run on all systems because the hardware manufacturers don't make drivers for it. That is the hardware companies making the limitation, not the OS. Even if it was, stop comparing the limitations of OSX and PC's because they are not comparable. Mac vs PC even though Macs use the same chips now. OSX vs Windows vs Linux.

SputnikGamer said,

You just argued my point for me. Macs run all three operating systems and software including the "huge library of software in every category from a wide variety of companies" while PC can only run 2 of the 3. That means any software that is OSX specific cannot run on all PC's. OSX can't run on all systems because the hardware manufacturers don't make drivers for it. That is the hardware companies making the limitation, not the OS. Even if it was, stop comparing the limitations of OSX and PC's because they are not comparable. Mac vs PC even though Macs use the same chips now. OSX vs Windows vs Linux.

Pc's could easily use OSX, if apple wasn't so douchey about it and keeping it locked to only their system....

shakey said,

Pc's could easily use OSX, if apple wasn't so douchey about it and keeping it locked to only their system....

Fail at reading? If you build a PC from scratch using hardware that has drivers in existence for OSX, it will run OSX. The limitation use to be that Mac used it's own specially created hardware but that has not be the case in years. Now it is hardware developers not creating drivers for their hardware that can run OSX. You going to argue that Linux is a closed system because most of the drivers have to be written by independent developers for their specific hardware and if no developer than knows how to create drivers ever makes it, that piece of hardware will never work with Linux?

Edited by SputnikGamer, May 13 2010, 7:28pm :

SputnikGamer said,

Fail at reading? If you build a PC from scratch using hardware that has drivers in existence for OSX, it will run OSX. The limitation use to be that Mac used it's own specially created hardware but that has not be the case in years. Now it is hardware developers not creating drivers for their hardware that can run OSX. You going to argue that Linux is a closed system because most of the drivers have to be written by independent developers for their specific hardware and if no developer than knows how to create drivers ever makes it, that piece of hardware will never work with Linux?

No, I'm using the argument that Apple says OSX can only be installed on their operating systems.

shakey said,

No, I'm using the argument that Apple says OSX can only be installed on their operating systems.

What are you talking about? Look up the specs for a mac. Buy the hardware seperately from newegg or some other source. Put it together and install OSX. Then install Windows. Then install Linux. No issues there. Pick up some random PC from Dell or some other company and try and install OSX. It won't work unless the driver support is there which the responsibility for comes solely from the hardware manufacturer. A Mac, brand new and out of the box will run any operating system. The same cannot be said for a regular PC unless the hardware matches.

SputnikGamer said,

What are you talking about? Look up the specs for a mac. Buy the hardware seperately from newegg or some other source. Put it together and install OSX. Then install Windows. Then install Linux. No issues there. Pick up some random PC from Dell or some other company and try and install OSX. It won't work unless the driver support is there which the responsibility for comes solely from the hardware manufacturer. A Mac, brand new and out of the box will run any operating system. The same cannot be said for a regular PC unless the hardware matches.

what are you going to install OSX from? hackintoshes area violation of the OSX EULA/TOS. it's not that you can't put OSX on the same hardware, it's that apple has locked out consumers from choosing what hardware to install OSX on.
there fore hardware companies only write drivers for hardware that comes in prebuilt macs or special mac editions, which is really a -1 for apple and macs overalll unless you're an apple fanboi and think it's awesome to be forced to use boot camp and buy a copy of windows on top of the extra price for OSX and the apple brand of a mac to have decent selection of software.
so what does a windows PC lose out on software wise versus a mac? seriously. i must assume due the course of this argument the answer is nothing, since mac users will typicallly run windows for everything that doesn't run on OSX.

treemonster said,

what are you going to install OSX from? hackintoshes area violation of the OSX EULA/TOS. it's not that you can't put OSX on the same hardware, it's that apple has locked out consumers from choosing what hardware to install OSX on.
there fore hardware companies only write drivers for hardware that comes in prebuilt macs or special mac editions, which is really a -1 for apple and macs overalll unless you're an apple fanboi and think it's awesome to be forced to use boot camp and buy a copy of windows on top of the extra price for OSX and the apple brand of a mac to have decent selection of software.
so what does a windows PC lose out on software wise versus a mac? seriously. i must assume due the course of this argument the answer is nothing, since mac users will typicallly run windows for everything that doesn't run on OSX.

A simple but obvious answer is the free movie maker and sound editor/recorder. The windows version doesn't even compare. Secondly the security of using OSX when doing only credit card stuff. It is simply easier to boot up OSX and use my credit card rather than boot up Windows, run a malware scan and hope if picks up everything, then use my credit card.

Also, are you suggesting that giving people the choice to use any of the three OS's is a bad thing? What happened to hating Apple for telling people what they can or cannot use. You not going to attack the hardware manufacturers for not giving you the choice of which OS you want to use on your custom PC. By them not making drivers for OSX, they take your choice away. Is it only bad when Apple takes your choices away?

SputnikGamer said,

A simple but obvious answer is the free movie maker and sound editor/recorder. The windows version doesn't even compare. Secondly the security of using OSX when doing only credit card stuff. It is simply easier to boot up OSX and use my credit card rather than boot up Windows, run a malware scan and hope if picks up everything, then use my credit card.

Also, are you suggesting that giving people the choice to use any of the three OS's is a bad thing? What happened to hating Apple for telling people what they can or cannot use. You not going to attack the hardware manufacturers for not giving you the choice of which OS you want to use on your custom PC. By them not making drivers for OSX, they take your choice away. Is it only bad when Apple takes your choices away?

i have no malware on my windows pc. i feel confident about it with no need to run a malware scan before each time i use my cc on the net.
i can't imagine the free apple video editing app being any better than windows movie maker, not that i imagine either are good. if the apple sound editor is even functional it's better than what comes with windows. but none of that is what i was asking either. i didn't say, what free prgrams comes with OSX that are better than what windows has. i asked, what prgorams run on OSX that windows doesn't have. you have yet againf ailed to answer the question at hand.

further why should hardware manufacturers support an OS with which maybe a handful of their customer might want to use and there is 0 demand for from their customer base? it's not the hardware manufacturers at fault here, it's apple for locking you into using OSX only on their prebuilt systems. hackintoshes are illegal, and require special knowledge and a hacked copy of OSX to install. i don't care how good OSX is supposed to be, when it's been shown to be inferior to both windows and linux on every level. it can't even properly use those multi core 64 bit cpu's in every mac for apps that would utilize them.

SputnikGamer said,

The advantage to using a Mac: You can install Windows, Mac osx, and Linux at the same time with little to no troubles, thus allowing you to use software from all three operating systems. The same cannot be said for a normal pc because most hardware companies dont make drivers for Macs. Using a PC limits your options on software. Using a Mac limits your options on hardware.

Most hardware manufacturers do create drivers for the hardware in Macs. Apple changes the device Ids so they aren't compatible. You will find no hardware in a Mac that isn't technically identical to the hardware in a PC.

treemonster said,

i have no malware on my windows pc. i feel confident about it with no need to run a malware scan before each time i use my cc on the net.
i can't imagine the free apple video editing app being any better than windows movie maker, not that i imagine either are good. if the apple sound editor is even functional it's better than what comes with windows. but none of that is what i was asking either. i didn't say, what free prgrams comes with OSX that are better than what windows has. i asked, what prgorams run on OSX that windows doesn't have. you have yet againf ailed to answer the question at hand.

further why should hardware manufacturers support an OS with which maybe a handful of their customer might want to use and there is 0 demand for from their customer base? it's not the hardware manufacturers at fault here, it's apple for locking you into using OSX only on their prebuilt systems. hackintoshes are illegal, and require special knowledge and a hacked copy of OSX to install. i don't care how good OSX is supposed to be, when it's been shown to be inferior to both windows and linux on every level. it can't even properly use those multi core 64 bit cpu's in every mac for apps that would utilize them.

I answered, you are just to arrogant to read it and understand. Also, just because you don't have malware on your computer doesn't mean much. Look at the rest of the general population that doesn't know how to use a computer properly.

When Nvidia drivers dont work on a Windows system, you blame Nvidia. When Nvidia doesn't work on a Mac, you blame make. You are nothing but a hypocritical fanboy.

SputnikGamer said,

I answered, you are just to arrogant to read it and understand. Also, just because you don't have malware on your computer doesn't mean much. Look at the rest of the general population that doesn't know how to use a computer properly.

When Nvidia drivers dont work on a Windows system, you blame Nvidia. When Nvidia doesn't work on a Mac, you blame make. You are nothing but a hypocritical fanboy.

As a matter of fact, I have answered multiple questions from you, but every time you change the question when my answer doesn't prove whatever point you are failing at proving and then say I didn't answer your new question, as if I knew that question before you asked it.

SputnikGamer said,

As a matter of fact, I have answered multiple questions from you, but every time you change the question when my answer doesn't prove whatever point you are failing at proving and then say I didn't answer your new question, as if I knew that question before you asked it.

please reread the OP.
here it is again:

i wonder, can those products be found for windows?
do they run just as well on windows as on OSX?
is there some advantage to using a mac to use those products over using them on a windows pc?

so can these products be found on windows or not?
what advantage is there to using a mac to use those programs over windows?
saying a mac can run windows is just admitting that windows has better program dev support.
iirc somewhere in these comments someone said something like, what's the point of using a mac if you're just bootcamping into windows?
if that's what you're doing might as well cut out hte mac hardware selection limitiations and the OSX library/support/utilization limitations and go with a from the bottom up windows pc.
claiming OSX is better since a mac can run windows and linux as well is pretty weak. might as well not have OSX in the equation at all.

treemonster said,

please reread the OP.
here it is again:

so can these products be found on windows or not?
what advantage is there to using a mac to use those programs over windows?
saying a mac can run windows is just admitting that windows has better program dev support.
iirc somewhere in these comments someone said something like, what's the point of using a mac if you're just bootcamping into windows?
if that's what you're doing might as well cut out hte mac hardware selection limitiations and the OSX library/support/utilization limitations and go with a from the bottom up windows pc.
claiming OSX is better since a mac can run windows and linux as well is pretty weak. might as well not have OSX in the equation at all.

Congrats on failing to compare like products. I gets annoying when people compare OSX to PC and not to Mac. OSX = Windows = Linux. OSX /= Mac just like Windows /= PC. I never calimed OSX was better. Which operating system you use has to do with what your needs are. I claimed Mac, as in the hardware, is better. I can run 3 different operating systems on it. A reg PC you can only run 2. Do the math. Its really not as hard as you are trying to make it. Stop being a part of the sheeple movement and letting the majority tell you you are better off no being able to do something. If you can't see that having options is a good thing, you are already a lost cause. I prefer to be able to use whatever OS I choose to.

LOL, they sound like a 4-year-old kid begging to go to the candy store. I get their problem, but seriously, if Apple wants to go HTML5 (IMO rightfully)... what can you do about it

amon91 said,
LOL, they sound like a 4-year-old kid begging to go to the candy store. I get their problem, but seriously, if Apple wants to go HTML5 (IMO rightfully)... what can you do about it

You......can drop support for the software that Apple is most famous for running beautifully...

Well done Adobe. Man, I would love if they would drop the Mac support. We'll see how that ignorant Jobs feels after that.

TDT said,
Well done Adobe. Man, I would love if they would drop the Mac support. We'll see how that ignorant Jobs feels after that.

If you read the interview with Adobe,you would see the part where it says that half of the customers who buy Adobe products use Macs. That would be more of a loss to Adobe than Apple since even if laptops and desktops stopping making profits, they could drop them and just as easily survive off their portable devices which would have no effect from no Adobe.

Edited by SputnikGamer, May 13 2010, 8:43pm :

thealexweb said,
Steve Jobs says Flash is to propriety, what about QuickTime for iPhone OS?

quicktime for iPhone OS is not required to play a lot of content on web sites around the world. The same way that media player on windows is not needed either.

REM2000 said,

quicktime for iPhone OS is not required to play a lot of content on web sites around the world. The same way that media player on windows is not needed either.

Whats that got to do with the openness argument at all?

thealexweb said,

Whats that got to do with the openness argument at all?

I fail to see your point as well. What does any media player have to do with web standards?

thealexweb said,
Steve Jobs says Flash is to propriety, what about QuickTime for iPhone OS?

Quicktime is used to play some video content that is an open standard or Apple's quicktime format. Any video content that is of an open standard can be played in anything that supports open standards. Flash video is not an open standard and requires Flash. There is a difference.

thealexweb said,
Steve Jobs says Flash is to propriety, what about QuickTime for iPhone OS?

You do realize that when he says Flash is propriety, he doesn't mean the player, he means the software Flash. The software that you HAVE to buy in order to create Flash files. My company has to spend thousands of dollars a year for a license that lets us give our customers the ability to create Flash content without owning Flash themselves. The same is not true for Quicktime or WMP or another of those similar players. You can use a variety of tools to create files that play on Quicktime that are completely free. Quicktime player and Flash player aren't even comparable. Flash player does one and only one thing, it plays Flash files. Quicktime plays a variety of file types to include the proprietary file types.

SputnikGamer said,

You do realize that when he says Flash is propriety, he doesn't mean the player, he means the software Flash. The software that you HAVE to buy in order to create Flash files. My company has to spend thousands of dollars a year for a license that lets us give our customers the ability to create Flash content without owning Flash themselves. The same is not true for Quicktime or WMP or another of those similar players. You can use a variety of tools to create files that play on Quicktime that are completely free. Quicktime player and Flash player aren't even comparable. Flash player does one and only one thing, it plays Flash files. Quicktime plays a variety of file types to include the proprietary file types.


do you expect the content creation tools to be free? Is your company selling its products and services for free. The lack of flash content creation tools other than the one provided by adobe is not adobe's fault. how does it make sense to you to compare quicktime to flash? flash is not just a video player...

zagor said,

how does it make sense to you to compare quicktime to flash? flash is not just a video player...

I didn't say it was only a video player? I said it was a Flash file player. The lack of flash content creation tools is adobes fault as every time one has come out(which hasn't happened since the days of Macromedia), it was shut down because Flash is propitiatory. I never said it should be that way. Look at the OP and read what was said. That was what I was commenting on. He is comparing Flash and Quicktime which apperently you and I both agree has no business being compared.

Klownicle said,
If Adobe dropped Apple support.. oh man..

Id just give a little snicker... heh.

Because the "support" they have no is in any way real support? Their products barely run on Mac OSX anymore.

SputnikGamer said,
Because the "support" they have no is in any way real support? Their products barely run on Mac OSX anymore.
Also not quite true. It finally came out that the reason video performs so poorly on OS X is because Apple locked out competitors from the necessary hardware APIs. This made Quicktime look better. It didn't hurt that Flash crashes frequently, and so does Acrobat Reader on Windows (well, it did back when I used it, before finding Foxit).

I will not defend the rest of Adobe's actions (specifically with regard to security), but a lot of their performance problems on the Mac, related specifically to H.264-based video, were because of Apple's unwillingness to release a public API to access the hardware acceleration. Practically everything else, such as their performance and memory consumption (Flash practically always demands a large amount of the CPU on a Mac, and even a lot of Windows) and the frequent crashes are its fault. They're all reason enough to move to Silverlight and HTML5 for me. Add in the high security issues and it's a no brainer to dump Flash as soon as one can.

Please Hulu, release a Silverlight version.

pickypg said,
Also not quite true. It finally came out that the reason video performs so poorly on OS X is because Apple locked out competitors from the necessary hardware APIs. This made Quicktime look better. It didn't hurt that Flash crashes frequently, and so does Acrobat Reader on Windows (well, it did back when I used it, before finding Foxit).

I will not defend the rest of Adobe's actions (specifically with regard to security), but a lot of their performance problems on the Mac, related specifically to H.264-based video, were because of Apple's unwillingness to release a public API to access the hardware acceleration. Practically everything else, such as their performance and memory consumption (Flash practically always demands a large amount of the CPU on a Mac, and even a lot of Windows) and the frequent crashes are its fault. They're all reason enough to move to Silverlight and HTML5 for me. Add in the high security issues and it's a no brainer to dump Flash as soon as one can.

Please Hulu, release a Silverlight version.

Would rather Hulu come out with a way to view its contents without an addon.

SputnikGamer said,
Would rather Hulu come out with a way to view its contents without an addon.
Oh, honestly, so do I, but I realize that the chances of moving to Silverlight are greater than HTML5 at the moment, due to the effectiveness of preventing users from simply downloading the video.

Plus, it would probably both perform and look better in Silverlight compared to JavaScript/HTML5.

Edited by pickypg, May 13 2010, 9:42pm :

pickypg said,
Oh, honestly, so do I, but I realize that the chances of moving to Silverlight are greater than HTML5 at the moment, due to the effectiveness of preventing users from simply downloading the video.

Plus, it would probably both perform and look better in Silverlight compared to JavaScript/HTML5.

Well that depends on browser support of HTML5. Some of the more advanced CSS sites these days look just as smooth as Silverlight and Flash so that is really on the developers. The argument though that it is about DRM and stopping illegal downloading got old after addons appeared that let you download any video on any page using simple download tools. Anyone that spends time on computers knows that but apparently the studios haven't picked up on that or they would be throwing hissy fits.

SputnikGamer said,
Well that depends on browser support of HTML5. Some of the more advanced CSS sites these days look just as smooth as Silverlight and Flash so that is really on the developers.

http://www.neowin.net/news/hul...ws-off-new-player-no-html-5

I would actually say that Hulu's change strengthens my argument. For starters, I have never seen something as smooth as Silverlight through a browser, including hardware accelerated Flash. Certainly there are some slick sites out there, but when you compare Javascript based development to Silverlight development, then the reason to use Javascript is far greater adoption, and not smoothness. Look at the Javascript implementation of Quake 2 in the browser as an example: without even trying it, I can guarantee that the same thing could be done much more optimally (not to mention developed faster) within Silverlight. JavaScript is quick in the modern browsers, but it is not as good as a strongly typed programming language. Add to that, they even get the opportunity to be pre-compiled into high performing byte codes, which get one further step of JIT (Just-In-Time) compilation to native code on your machine. JavaScript gets the JIT approach by most modern approaches, but the other optimizations afforded by tools such as Silverlight will probably never be truly caught up with, but the gap will eventually just get small enough that no one will care.
SputnikGamer said,
The argument though that it is about DRM and stopping illegal downloading got old after addons appeared that let you download any video on any page using simple download tools. Anyone that spends time on computers knows that but apparently the studios haven't picked up on that or they would be throwing hissy fits.
Just because the means to get around it exist, does not mean that the studios have given up on blocking the unknowing masses from entering the domain of simple downloads, nor does it mean that they have given up on finding new ways to avoid the problem. I guarantee that they recognize the problem exists--that is after all the basis for the DRM contract that Apple originally claims to have signed (any bugs found in Apple's DRM would start a ticking clock lasting for mere weeks, after-which the studios could pull all of their music from the store if it had not been corrected). That's just the reality of the world we live in, and aside from all of the hoopla that the studios like to put us through (the various copyright laws that they'd enjoy to have ruling our petty lives, such as the recent open network in Germany case), they know that technology is not perfect and that is exactly why they do not go digital distribution as their primary source.

Physical media provides a padded fee for the end user, but also it provides a singular source of "misuse." All-digital bits can be easily copied by the least savvy of computer users, which leaves the DRM as the final wall of defense. Yes, it probably can't stop the determined on this site, but it can for-sure stop the person that can't even figure out how to rip, and burn a copy.

Edited by pickypg, May 14 2010, 7:57pm : Removed smiley from quoted text.

That's a good one for Adobe... But I still hate Apple....

Now, don't get me wrong... They have amazing products, but I hate the way they are doing everything...

leo221 said,
drop creative suite for osx

If Adobe really wants to play hard ball, they should. They have stated that Creative Suite users help Mac sells, and not the other way around. I think they are probably right... but time for them to put some money where their mouth is, pull the plug on CS for Mac, and see what happens.

Shadrack said,

If Adobe really wants to play hard ball, they should. They have stated that Creative Suite users help Mac sells, and not the other way around. I think they are probably right... but time for them to put some money where their mouth is, pull the plug on CS for Mac, and see what happens.

How much is Adobe willing to loose in this battle ?
Even if their argument is true, which I don't have believe, I'll bet it's 50/50 who use Apple because of Adobe, and use Adobe because of Apple.. They will still loose out on at least a generation of sales while current Mac users stick with their current version till their system reaches the end of it's life cycle.. And that offers up a massive chance for anyone else to try and make a competing product for MacOS..

Does anyone really think Apple couldn't make Photoshop almost as good as Adobe with their resources ?

Ryoken said,
How much is Adobe willing to loose in this battle ?
Even if their argument is true, which I don't have believe, I'll bet it's 50/50 who use Apple because of Adobe, and use Adobe because of Apple.. They will still loose out on at least a generation of sales while current Mac users stick with their current version till their system reaches the end of it's life cycle.. And that offers up a massive chance for anyone else to try and make a competing product for MacOS..

Does anyone really think Apple couldn't make Photoshop almost as good as Adobe with their resources ?

I really like Pixelmator myself... I'd buy that over Photoshop (or Photoshop Elements) anyday but I'm not a professional graphics artist (not by a long shot).

I haven't found a good native vector graphics layout program yet though. I've been using InkScape but the Gtk libraries take forever to load and the UI is really non-Mac. Its a shame.

Ryoken said,
How much is Adobe willing to loose in this battle ?
Even if their argument is true, which I don't have believe, I'll bet it's 50/50 who use Apple because of Adobe, and use Adobe because of Apple.. They will still loose out on at least a generation of sales while current Mac users stick with their current version till their system reaches the end of it's life cycle.. And that offers up a massive chance for anyone else to try and make a competing product for MacOS..

Does anyone really think Apple couldn't make Photoshop almost as good as Adobe with their resources ?

I think adobe can really make a big effect on apple if they start providing incentives for mac creative suite users if they migrate to other. It will also make a big hole in their pocket but will ruin apple if any big player shows support to adobe.

Ryoken said,
Does anyone really think Apple couldn't make Photoshop almost as good as Adobe with their resources ?

Resources is not everything. They don't have know-how that Adobe has after so many years dominating in this field...

Ryoken said,
Does anyone really think Apple couldn't make Photoshop almost as good as Adobe with their resources ?

Yes. A critical thing that Apple doesn't have on Adobe is a proprietary format that is ubiquitous across multiple platforms. Just like Office/.doc(x), the PSD and AI formats are de facto standards in the industry. If Adobe tanked tomorrow and no more CS products were released, it would still take years for people to migrate to a different product with different formats.

Relativity_17 said,

Yes. A critical thing that Apple doesn't have on Adobe is a proprietary format that is ubiquitous across multiple platforms. Just like Office/.doc(x), the PSD and AI formats are de facto standards in the industry. If Adobe tanked tomorrow and no more CS products were released, it would still take years for people to migrate to a different product with different formats.

Well, if Adobe dropped Mac from the next CS, it would take years to migrate anyway. Plenty of time for Apple to come up with a contingency plan. (Didn't work too well for Adobe when they dropped Premiere from Mac, did it?)

Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple

Enough already!
Neowin isn't as bad as some tech sites have become but Apple is every where you go and it's always some trivial article. Make an apple news room or something and dump all this stuff in there.

Felix_ said,
Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple

Enough already!
Neowin isn't as bad as some tech sites have become but Apple is every where you go and it's always some trivial article. Make an apple news room or something and dump all this stuff in there.


Remember you can click the Custom tab on the front page and type in which tags you'd like to see. I don't know if there's an option to hide a tag e.g. Apple, but it's a good idea. Maybe you should suggest it in S&FI.

Felix_ said,
Enough already!
Neowin isn't as bad as some tech sites have become but Apple is every where you go and it's always some trivial article. Make an apple news room or something and dump all this stuff in there.

+1

Felix_ said,

Enough already!
Neowin isn't as bad as some tech sites have become but Apple is every where you go and it's always some trivial article. Make an apple news room or something and dump all this stuff in there.

We do not set the tech trends.. some weeks you get all Apple, others you get all Microsoft, we don't control the news, it just comes this way.

I think this story is important as it's possibly the closure to a long story that we have been following.
Hope that helps You can always use the custom tab to not see Apple news.

"Apple" news clearly generates a lot of hits, just looking at how many people come and comment about everything "Apple" related (fanboy, troll, or casual observer). So it seems like anything Apple related helps generate advertisement revenue for Neowin just as much as anything else. If it bothers you, you can customize your news page to include everything but Apple news.

Goto "Custom" right above the start of the news, select all the tags you are interested in (sans-Apple, obviously) and there you go, no more Apple news for you. No more complaining non-productive comments for us to read.

Edited by Shadrack, May 13 2010, 5:19pm :

Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple
Apple Apple Apple Worm Apple
Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple
Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple
Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple

Sorry, couldn't resist

Felix_ said,
Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple Apple

Enough already!
Neowin isn't as bad as some tech sites have become but Apple is every where you go and it's always some trivial article. Make an apple news room or something and dump all this stuff in there.

+1

Felix_ said,

Enough already!
Neowin isn't as bad as some tech sites have become but Apple is every where you go and it's always some trivial article. Make an apple news room or something and dump all this stuff in there.
+1

Shadrack said,
"Apple" news clearly generates a lot of hits, just looking at how many people come and comment about everything "Apple" related (fanboy, troll, or casual observer). So it seems like anything Apple related helps generate advertisement revenue for Neowin just as much as anything else. If it bothers you, you can customize your news page to include everything but Apple news.

Nicely put, but for me, this story wasn't about hits, comments or anything else, but continuing the story between Adobe and Apple. If we miss an important link in the story, it just confuses readers.

and Yes, people can filter news that way. Thanks for pointing that out

Andrew Lyle said,
We do not set the tech trends.. some weeks you get all Apple, others you get all Microsoft, we don't control the news, it just comes this way.

You do control the news. You can put FLOSS/GNU/Linux news every day in either the frontpage or the software news, but you choose not to.

tiagosilva29 said,

You do control the news. You can put FLOSS/GNU/Linux news every day in either the frontpage or the software news, but you choose not to.

like what? there is no linux news lol. "bloated distros ubuntu, fedora, mandriva and mint released something that breaks", or "Precompiled gentoo (arch) released something". not really weekly content worthy.

bb10 said,
Desperate Adobe...
You can say, but the above statement "Mac users don't buy half of Adobe's Creative Suite products, Creative Suite users purchase Macs as their platform of choice. If Adobe dropped Mac support, Apple would sell far less computers. " Is true according to me I have personally seen 4-5 people buying macs just for this reason, but creative suite works just awesome on my win7

Shishant said,
You can say, but the above statement "Mac users don't buy half of Adobe's Creative Suite products, Creative Suite users purchase Macs as their platform of choice. If Adobe dropped Mac support, Apple would sell far less computers. " Is true according to me I have personally seen 4-5 people buying macs just for this reason, but creative suite works just awesome on my win7

Adobe would also sell far less Creative Suites. They won't risk that.

dave164 said,
Same thing could be said for Apple when they had there Mac vs PC ads.

Yes. And...?

bb10 said,

Adobe would also sell far less Creative Suites. They won't risk that.


Yes. And...?

I think Creative Suites sale on mac account for 10% (still not sure) but if that is the figure its really bigger than 90%

bb10 said,
Desperate Adobe...

Indeed. Should have done that campaign in Flash though. Anyway, they should concentrate their energy to improve Flash and to show the iPhone/iPad/iPod touch users what they are missing out.

leadpipe said,

Indeed. Should have done that campaign in Flash though. Anyway, they should concentrate their energy to improve Flash and to show the iPhone/iPad/iPod touch users what they are missing out.

They've had almost 14 years to improve it and it still sucks. Time for something else to take over. I haven't had flash on my PC in over a year.

Shishant said,
You can say, but the above statement "Mac users don't buy half of Adobe's Creative Suite products, Creative Suite users purchase Macs as their platform of choice. If Adobe dropped Mac support, Apple would sell far less computers. " Is true according to me I have personally seen 4-5 people buying macs just for this reason, but creative suite works just awesome on my win7

I agree that going with Mac OS X secondary to the fact that people needed Creative Suit first, but the same time though the choice of Mac OS X for many years came first and because Creative Suite was available on both platforms it wasn't a matter that if you choose on you can't have the other. Today, however, Windows 7 is friggin awesome, it has pulled ahead of Mac OS X and now you are right - people are choosing their platform based on what it can do, and if there is no 'difference' in terms of software availability, other considerations such as price and performance will come into the equation.

In the case of the Windows 7 world, Creative Suite runs beautifully and because Microsoft works with third parties closely, it is incredibly optimised for Windows. Add to that Windows 7 taking better advantage of the hardware (DirectComput, DXVA 2.0 etc), hardware being cheaper versus performance ( http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...nux_windows_part3&num=1 ) - the reason for using Mac OS X other than political considerations has been thrown out the window.

I don't think Apple in the end really actually gives a crap about their desktop to be quite frank (above doing the bare minimum) - they know they've got a legion of 'true believers' who will stick with them, rain, hail or shine. Hell, these are the same people who kept with Apple even with Mac OS 9 being shipped and a better alternative (Windows 9x and NT) being offered by Microsoft. If people are willing to hang around with you whilst shipping a subpar operating system like Mac OS 9 then I think you've pretty much got them hooked - the only people more devoted to a brand would have to be the Amiga fan.

Edited by rawr_boy81, May 14 2010, 12:22am :

leadpipe said,

Indeed. Should have done that campaign in Flash though. Anyway, they should concentrate their energy to improve Flash and to show the iPhone/iPad/iPod touch users what they are missing out.

+1

bb10 said,

Adobe would also sell far less Creative Suites. They won't risk that.

doubtful. apple being the only editing option is no longer true. I have quite a few friends that do video / audio editing that no longer use macs.

Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

+1

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

what? you mean HTC?

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

+1

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

+1

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

Bear in mind that a few other manufacturers like Microsoft, Opera etc have also come out to say that Flash is crap.

REM2000 said,

Bear in mind that a few other manufacturers like Microsoft, Opera etc have also come out to say that Flash is crap.

Apple said from day 1 what they wanted and customers bought it. This isn't like Sony taking a feature away. This is Apple denying people the ability to use something on their system. Would you lot expect Sony to get a lawsuit thrown at them because the PS3 wont run Xbox games? They never said it would. So what's the problem? Apple is well within it's legal rights to disallow applications or environments on their own hardware. As long as they aren't changing goalposts. And they haven't.

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

Apple has a monopoly? On what? They simply run a store and have the right to say what goes in that store. You don't think that Barnes & Noble have monopoly on books do you? The issue of Flash not being supported on the iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad has more to do with Flash's poor performance. Adobe is just now bringing a decent mobile version of Flash out. And it's still a beta. Can't really blame Apple for not supporting it yet.

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

For monopolistic reasons? A company should have more than 40% share of the market to be considered a monopoly. With the share that Apple has, that is highly doubtful.

spenumatsa said,

For monopolistic reasons? A company should have more than 40% share of the market to be considered a monopoly. With the share that Apple has, that is highly doubtful.


you don't have to be a monopoly. If you engage in certain actions to block competition, you are in FTC's radar

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

Yeah, same here.

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.
What monopoly? The iPhone is not the only smart phone you know, there are others. I fail to see any monopoly here and Apple are free to do what they want on their device and if you don't like it, there are plenty of alternatives to choose from. All Apple are doing is pushing away customers/developers/business partners to their rivals.

zagor said,

you don't have to be a monopoly. If you engage in certain actions to block competition, you are in FTC's radar

Its their hardware and their OS so they can do whatever they want. As far as tehy care, they could sell the iPad locked without any apps and noone can do anything about it.

Elessar said,
Just waiting for the FTC to come down on Apple for monopolistic reasons. It's crazy the power they have over their consumers.

I would say that about all phone companies; what there needs is a single protocol agreed on which stops the lock in between not only software and phones/media devices but also operating systems and phones/media devices. Develop a single protocol that anyone can implement and use free of charge, and then have phones compete based on features rather than whether or not it'll work with a certain operating system or whether you have to go through some appstore simply to get access to software. the issue is more broad than just the appstore - it just so happen to be that the iPhone is becoming the lightening rod for years of stupid decisions by hardware and software companies.

Euphoria said,

Its their hardware and their OS so they can do whatever they want. As far as tehy care, they could sell the iPad locked without any apps and noone can do anything about it.

LOL...that is not true.

REM2000 said,

Bear in mind that a few other manufacturers like Microsoft, Opera etc have also come out to say that Flash is crap.

yes MS said flash is crap. but MS isnt saying you cant do anything with us anymore. They say "your crap but ill let you come hang out anyways. You can be the slow kid in the group we laugh at"

Euphoria said,

Its their hardware and their OS so they can do whatever they want. As far as tehy care, they could sell the iPad locked without any apps and noone can do anything about it.

Funny, when MIcrosoft tried that it didn't work too well, did it?

ilev said,

Any one complained to the FTC regrading the locked KIN ?


if you do not understand the simple differences, you shouldn't be commenting.

Looks like Adobe taking the higher road here. Good on them. Must be tough fighting a giant that's possessed with people staying in their own iTunes/Apple environment.

neoxphuse said,
Looks like Adobe taking the higher road here. Good on them.
This isn't taking the high road. This is tit for tat that's become petty and ridiculous.

Edited by error404ts, May 13 2010, 6:05pm :

neoxphuse said,
Looks like Adobe taking the higher road here. Good on them. Must be tough fighting a giant that's possessed with people staying in their own iTunes/Apple environment.

IMHO it looks like Adobe is still on the defensive, doing this stuff.

I thought we had heard the end of this now, but apparently not. Adobe still can't just drop it and move on.

tylershaw said,
This isn't taking the high road. This is tit for tat that's become petty and ridiculous.

Yeah, I have to agree. This whole thing (On both sides) has become ridiculous.

Oh look a nerd fight (Apple Vs Adobe). Maybe now both of these companies can finally destroy each other so we can be rid of them both. I like my iPhone and I like Photoshop as well, but I have a vested interest in neither (and could survive without either).

Anyone who defines themselves by either one of these companies or for that matter, any company is lost. //end rant

Edited by azure.sapphire, May 13 2010, 10:42pm :