Home > Apple > Adobe Pares Mac Support Adobe Pares Mac Support Eugenia Loli 2003-07-07 Apple 81 Comments Adobe Systems plans to announce new versions of its video-editing software Monday, including a Windows-only application that marks another high-profile defection from Apple Computer’s Macintosh operating system, News.com says. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 81 Comments 2003-07-07 6:07 am It seems that Adobe bailed out of porting Adobe Premier because there is iMovie in the low-end market, Final Cut Pro in the high-end and now, Final Cut Express in the middle end one. When you have to compete on all levels of a market that is barely 3% of the global OS market, especially when you have to compete against a product that comes directly from the same company that does the OS, doesn’t leave much room for breath for healthy profits to a big company like Adobe who expect more than other companies from such products. In the Windows world things are not so difficult for Adobe, as they have established a big name in middle/pro video editing market, plus the market is so big (94%) that there is a lot of space for more players to profit. This is not to say that I am happy with this situation — as it is a beating for the Mac, we like it or not — however I do understand the reasons why Adobe made these decisions to not support OSX with the new Premiere. From the article: The Mac already has several competing video-editing applications, including Apple’s Final Cut family of products, making for a small and crowded market, he said. “If Apple’s already doing an application, it makes the market for a third-party developer that much smaller,” Trescot said. “I think you’re going to find that more and more–if Apple’s in a software market, third-party vendors are going to skip it.” 2003-07-07 6:07 am Nice, they wanna drop Apple support? Could it be that we will see more apps ported to Linux rather than to OS X? Why hurt Apple? Is this some evil plan? 2003-07-07 6:08 am Could it be that we will see more apps ported to Linux rather than to OS X? I can assure you, if Adobe doesn’t care as much for the Apple platform, they care way less for the Linux one… 2003-07-07 6:12 am I didn’t refer just to Adobe. Generally everyone wants to screw Apple this days… re: OS X 2003-07-07 6:27 am Final Cut Pro’s better and iMovie’s cheap and/or free. Inbetween and above are a bunch of great niche apps that fit in most people’s price range. Anyone doing high end editing will general have a dedicated machine for the task anyways. Adobe makes great products and I imagine it took some careful consideration for Apple to invade the video-editing market, but it’s Adobe’s other apps that they need to be careful about. GIMP is a rather paltry (although capable) offering in contrast to Photoshop, here’s hoping that stays around for a long time on the Mac platform. Business is business, but I just would hate to see this start being a trend – MS with Explorer (never mind how bad it was), and now Adobe with this. 2003-07-07 6:27 am Wine runs: – Photoshop 6/7 – InDesign 2 – Illustrator 10 2003-07-07 6:28 am **** Adobe. It has become apparent that they arent up to the task of challenging Final Cut Pro. 2003-07-07 6:34 am Its not because Apple does the software, FinalCutPro is not leader in the video-editing market because Apple does it, no …..its because its the best on any plate form, and Adobe could not compete against the potential of Finalcutpro. I am a little bit disapointed that adobe don’t try to fight a little bit, or to try to compete because user choose FinnalCutPro because of its quality not because apple does it. If Adobe could compete and try to propose a similar product, they could for sure still have a lot of users, but it seems that they can not or dont’t want. And don’t forget that Premiere has never been optimized proporly for the mac plate form, and i think there is no surprise that everyone choose Apple’s solutions much performant and powerful without even talking about features of each software. The only thing important is that Apple wan the video-editing war, and on any plate form, now when you talk about serious video-editing you talk about FinalCutPro!!!!! 2003-07-07 6:34 am so much for the G5 hype re-igniting the interests of the video crowd, then. 2003-07-07 6:38 am Its not “plate form”, its platform. Maybe you’re taking your breakfast on a plate form? Anyway, Apple is nice…and so on… 2003-07-07 6:39 am Oh, you Mac heads. I love how you turn the discussion in the way that is more suitable for you. You say that Premiere is not as good as Final Cut and this is why Adobe bailed out, or you say that Adobe didn’t want to even fight the video editing war. But, you miss the real point. You don’t think as businessmen, you think as Mac users who don’t want to hear anything bad about their apple. The point is that there was no reason for a “war”. Adobe saw that Apple had covered their whole market with their products and their advertising to the Mac users, so in that mere 3%, there is absolutely no space for Adobe or any other video editing maker to make money. Don’t you see that with Apple doing this, Apple is shooting its own foot? Apple seems to think of today and how to make a buck today, instead of thinking of the future and their market and how to enrich that market. I find this very dissapointing. As for Final Cut being better than Premier, you don’t know that. Adobe said that they re-written their application, and AFAIK, none of you commenting here so far played with it. So please, don’t comment that this or that is better. You don’t know. And you know something? It doesn’t matter. Not always the best wins. 2003-07-07 6:42 am There is this Walgreens commercial:”We don’t leave near perfect, so there is Walgreens…”. This could be adapted in the computer world like this: “We don’t compute near perfect, so there is Apple…” 2003-07-07 6:44 am What were the defections before Adobe? (Curious) 2003-07-07 7:02 am You say that Premiere is not as good as Final Cut and this is why Adobe bailed out, or you say that Adobe didn’t want to even fight the video editing war. The product vendor is offering a significantly better application. No one on Mac is purchasing Premiere. Why then should Adobe continue to support it. But, you miss the real point. You don’t think as businessmen, you think as Mac users who don’t want to hear anything bad about their apple. I think your latter statements prove that it is you who is missing the point: Don’t you see that with Apple doing this, Apple is shooting its own foot? Apple seems to think of today and how to make a buck today, instead of thinking of the future and their market and how to enrich that market. Apple has been purchasing corporations who make products related to video post production. By doing this, they essentially ensure that all video post production will be done on a Mac. Apple has existed off niche markets for decades, and now they are simply ensuring control of yet another niche. Apple already has an impressive lineup with applications like Final Cut Pro, Shake, and DVD Studio Pro. As for Final Cut being better than Premier, you don’t know that. Adobe said that they re-written their application, and AFAIK, none of you commenting here so far played with it. So please, don’t comment that this or that is better. You don’t know. Well, compare real applications to vaporware all you please, it doesn’t change the fact that Final Cut Pro is a better application today and video production houses are not going to abandon the Mac platform because a program they don’t use will no longer be available. And you know something? It doesn’t matter. Not always the best wins. Considering pro video production and post-production is already handled almost exclusively on Macs, I’d say the best has already won. 2003-07-07 7:11 am The bottom line is: the apple niche is getting crowded. And that’s because, the market is small and shrinking. You know the market is getting real small when there isn’t enough room for just two vendors. Thesedays, apple getting into anything is a sign that others should leave. So, there’s only one solution: expand apple’s market share. Its that, or apple will progressively get into more trouble in the pc market. And no, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they will stop making profits, because they can still do other consumer products. But it may ultimately spell the end of the mac platform. Here’s to hoping nothing of the sort happens. 2003-07-07 7:12 am IIRC Oracle announced its database on OS X. Actually Premiere is well known and respected on the PC market, but on the Mac side it has always been a low-end not-so-good program. Mac is the traditional platform of choice for video editing with Avid, and Final Cut Pro more or less put Premiere out of sight: I know nobody AT ALL using premiere on Macintosh… 2003-07-07 7:14 am Good business decision. http://www.adobe.com/motion/main.html http://www.adobe.com/products/main.html 2003-07-07 7:16 am exactly… i was about to say the same thing, bascule. apple had been very ambitious in 2002 by quietly acquiring many top video and audio compositing software companies. The fruit of such acquisitions is just now coming to bearing however. i don’t understand how people can even make the claim that apple is not thinking of tomorrow when they were obviously thinking about tomorrow when they bought top-of-the-line audio compositing software shake and killed the windows version. This alone assures that apple will always control that market. Furthermore, Final Cut Pro and DVD Studio Pro are top-of-the-line, award-winning softwares that further ensure the macs survivability, albeit in niche markets. apple just knows how to make good software; thus, there is little room for others to compete. Adobe has a good stand in the pc market because, frankly, there is no competitor like Apple for them on that the platform… unless i am mistaken (but i doubt it)… … I don’t think the mac platforms is going out anywhere… 2003-07-07 7:20 am And Nostra Damus announced dooms day a long time ago… Get the idea? So, any time there is the smallest news regarding Apple people jump all over it. Why? Because of the constant need to bitch about something… No, Apple will not die yet, they will live for a long time, they have $, they have brains, and their own platform. By the way, say : “Cheese!” 2003-07-07 7:21 am Nothing is killing off Adobe. Adobe enters a market based on TWO conditions, firstly they can make their money back and secondly, that there is either a lack of that particular application or the application that dominates that market is crap. Just look at Indesign 2 vs. Quark. You don’t see Adobe suddenly giving up on the Indesign Mac version because Quark 6.0 is released? do you? The fact remains that Apple has now created a product that can compete feature for feature with Premier and all Adobe has done is rationalised their product line up. Should they try to flog a dead horse when there is already a new one that has replaced it? It has nothing to do with the lack luser performance of the G4 line or MacOS X. Consider this, MacOS X has been out for three years and yet, there are still more applications out there written MacOS X than there are certified Windows XP applications. Apple is back on track and if it can play their cards right, concertrate on their core markets, and don’t do something bloody stupid like “taking Microsoft on head to head”, then they should survive. Btw, their switch campaign isn’t directed all and sundry, only those who want an alternative. They are simply saying, “hey, if you want an alternative to Windows, look at us”. There aren’t going down and saving that all and sundry should move to the one true platform. As for the G5 line up, I am looking forward to when they bump up the speed in 2004 and pull the current CPU’s down the iMac and eMac range. As for the pricing. If you can’t afford it, don’t complain. It seems we have thousands of people out there envious of Mac users because they have the cash to run a Mac. If you can’t afford it, stiff bicky. I would really love to own an SGI Octane 2, however, I certainly don’t jump on this forum and ring up SGI pleading that they lower the price fro $14,000 to $3000! I accept that if I want it, I have to pay the going rate. Since I don’t have the money, I accept I can’t afford it and move on with life unlike the closet-mac-envious crowd who whine and moan on this forum. 2003-07-07 7:24 am This is the option I choice in yesterdays poll’s. Apple just doesn’t have the software. On Windows you can choose from a million appz that do the same and choose the one that fits you personaly or the freeware version. Anyway this is not good for the future of Apple. As it makes switching harder and corparations loose programmers or know how of the powerpc platform. 2003-07-07 7:32 am I’ve seen a zillion expensive apps on Windows, and I’m bewildered that some people pay for some of that crap. The “low end” ($50>) apps are amazingly targetted at people who let the salesman tell them what they need. I dunno about the Mac, but in Windows, Pro Tools, AutoCAD and StudioViz are the only truely impressive, albeit expensive apps I’ve seen. Others are decent, but for the money? Who the hell would pay even $100 if there was an alternative to Office that was truely viable? PhotoShop almost makes my shortlist, but it’s too awkward to use. Little imrovements here and there. I guess I’m just spouting strong opinions, though 😛 But yeah, a lot of amazing wastes of money to be had in Windows. Truely consumer vaporware. 2003-07-07 7:49 am A question I have: Did they rewrite Premiere using Qt (as they did with Photoshop Album) or just straight to the Win32 API, MFC, or whatever they’ve been using for their UI on Windows? If they used Qt, what could that mean for the ability to port Premiere to Linux someday (when it makes biz sense of course)? 2003-07-07 7:53 am As for Final Cut being better than Premier, you don’t know that. Adobe said that they re-written their application, and AFAIK, none of you commenting here so far played with it. So please, don’t comment that this or that is better… To think that Apple wouldn’t have a slight edge in optimizing their own software for their own platform is just plain silly. Premiere was never really a consideration for anyone doing professional video editing. Maybe the very low end of video production on the Windows platform, but that’s about it. It is in that wacky space sometimes called pro-sumer. There are many alternatives to the program that are indeed better. 2003-07-07 8:15 am Don’t you see that with Apple doing this, Apple is shooting its own foot? Apple seems to think of today and how to make a buck today, instead of thinking of the future and their market and how to enrich that market. You’re assuming their only business is selling the Mac. Until recently, that was pretty much true. However, over the last couple of years they’ve been developing new streams of revenue, making themselves less dependent on the Mac. Establishing themselves as a software house actually gives them quite a few more options if Mac sales go south. For example, they could either port their premier apps like FinalCutPro to Windows, where they would have a much larger market. Or they could begin licensing Mac OS X, allow clone makers to grow the market, and simply capitalize on being the premier software supplier on the platform (worked pretty good for Microsoft in the PC world, didn’t it?). The point is, diversification is good for their corporate health. Being dependent on strictly selling the Mac puts them in a precarious position. Actually, I expect to see them get deeper into the software business in a big way. So really, from a broader perspective, this is enriching their market for the future. 2003-07-07 8:43 am Adobe to Steve Jobs….Hit the Road Mac !!!! Jobs is looking to FULLY control the software market for Apple. As Apple’s sales share and total units/yr sold continue to decline,Jobs is looking for every bit of profit he can generate just to keep the stockholders from taking him to court. And you Macheads and Linuxloosers bitch about Bill Gates….wake up and smell the roses….errr,when you get off the dope. 2003-07-07 8:51 am my god, how conceited and close-minded can u people be?!!! Honestly, why are people always denying apple the opportunity and possibility to survive? its almost as if the company was hexed from the beginning for such criticism. man, seriously, sabreman… and then you wonder how mac zealots are born… honestly, why do people hate apple so much? No, i’m serious… answer me this question… “Why do people hate Apple so much?” I don’t think that Steve Jobs is an idiot. As a CEO of two major companies, I admire is suave mix of business-sense and charismatic personality… So, what makes you think that as a businessman he will allow his company to just tank? So, “Why do people hate Apple so much?” 2003-07-07 8:53 am Here’s an interesting story for you. I was chatting on #winehq a few weeks back (as I am wont to do), when a guy called kk_singh joined. His (I assume it was a guy) hostmask identified him as connecting from adobe.com Anyway, he was asking some questions about Wine, in particular, he was asking whether anybody was working on accessibility support. I asked him whether this was work for Adobe and after being a bit surprised (he didn’t seem to know about hostmasks) he said it was, and that they were running a study into how their software behaves when run under Wine. We chatted for a bit about a possible mapping between OLEACC (the MS accessibility toolkit) and AT-SPI (gnome), and he said he was confident the mapping woule work as AT-SPI is wider than IAccessible, so he had clearly done his homework. Shortly after we finished talking he left, but it’s interesting to know that they are examining Wine as a company – presumably they were somewhat woken up by CrossOver announcing support for Photoshop (he said he already knew well about that). So, maybe in future we will see Adobe contributing to Wine and using it to port their products, just as Corel and Borland have done (hopefully more successfully than those two companies did it). 2003-07-07 9:14 am Agreed “:-)”. I’m not saying that Mac’s are the best computers in the world, because people have different needs. I don’t get how much some people hate apple. I thought that most people supported the underdog; I mean 2-3% market share. Come on guy’s why do some of you hate apple so much? 2003-07-07 9:48 am While you’re giving English lessons, do you want to correct the rest of the mistakes in that person’s post? English isn’t everyone’s first language. 2003-07-07 10:10 am Most people don’t hate Apple – they just think it is irrelevant to them. If you don’t code *nix or do multimedia you probably don’t need to use Mac. People use wintel at work and at home too. Piracy is a reality regardless of whether it is right or wrong. MS doesn’t seem to have much of problem with their software being pirated for private use. They certainly don’t make much effort to prevent piracy. What does infuriate non-Mac users is the zealotry. I am sick of hearing that wintel hardware is junk and XP crashes constantly – both ridiculous statements. OSX has similar stability to XP. Macs are mostly standard wintel hardware. The average “Mascist” makes Pollyanna seem like a perpetual pessimist. Adobe is moving from Mac because it is percieved as an unprofitable, dying platform not because it can’t compete with Final Cut. Adobe is a much bigger corporation than Apple. Apple doesn’t even post it’s financials on its website. Commodore was the worlds biggest PC maker at one stage, great technology (Amiga) a fanatical following. CBM is no more. Amiga is a hobbyist OS. Why is Apple different? 2003-07-07 10:33 am RE: Bruno the Arrogant (IP: —.dsl.emhril.ameritech.net) Or better yet, maybe Apple has actually realised that a person is more likely going to upgrade their software on a regular basis that their hardware? Ultimately, it isn’t the machine that dictates what the customer puchases but what runs on it, both the operating system and applications. You can have the best operating system in the world, however, if the applications are crap, don’t expect customers to come. Same case when done in reverse. RE: 🙂 (IP: —.satx.rr.com) The reason why people hate Apple is because every CEO hasn’t been a major dork feature geek with less personal skills than a slug. Everything anti-apple zealots say get persons such as what I said. It seems that everyone wants macs but 95% are too cheap-ass poverty stricken to afford one. Cry me a bloody river because I certainly don’t feel guilty being in the top 5%. RE: Anonymous (IP: —.tpgi.com.au) Most people don’t hate Apple – they just think it is irrelevant to them. If you don’t code *nix or do multimedia you probably don’t need to use Mac. People use wintel at work and at home too. Piracy is a reality regardless of whether it is right or wrong. MS doesn’t seem to have much of problem with their software being pirated for private use. They certainly don’t make much effort to prevent piracy. Microsoft does try to stop piracy in the hope they can make money off the unpaying populace. Personally, they need to crack down harder on piraters. Heck, I’d go so far in seeing torture and jail sentences being handed down of up to 50years. What does infuriate non-Mac users is the zealotry. I am sick of hearing that wintel hardware is junk and XP crashes constantly – both ridiculous statements. OSX has similar stability to XP. Macs are mostly standard wintel hardware. Wintel hardware is junk. The Bios’s are junk, the chip sets are buggy, the drivers are buggy and worse still there are numerous hardware combinations that don’t work together. Heck, Gigabyte motherboards and Nvidia video cards would be one example of where a video card can be incompatible with a motherboard! I certainly don’t consider Windows XP unstable, however, it doesn’t help when the underlying hardware is of crap quality because we have johnny cheapskates such as yourself demanding cheaper and cheaper and cheaper and cheaper hardware. When things get cheaper, something has to go, either features or quality, and in some cases, both. The average “Mascist” makes Pollyanna seem like a perpetual pessimist. Adobe is moving from Mac because it is percieved as an unprofitable, dying platform not because it can’t compete with Final Cut. Adobe is a much bigger corporation than Apple. Apple doesn’t even post it’s financials on its website. Who said they can’t compete? maybe Adobe simply said that the market is well catered for via Apples line up and it makes VERY little sense adding another application to the mix which will most likely NOT return a profit on the investment. Commodore was the worlds biggest PC maker at one stage, great technology (Amiga) a fanatical following. CBM is no more. Amiga is a hobbyist OS. Why is Apple different? Because Apple isn’t owned by a hybrid company who gradually killed off the Amiga business and whilst that happened, cooked the books to make it appear they had bigger profits. If anything, I would be more concerned if I was an HP-UX customer considering the sycophantic nature of their business constantly sucking up to Microsoft every waking moment. 2003-07-07 11:52 am that’s what Adobe should offer current Mac users for free for upgrading… 2003-07-07 11:54 am excuse by adobe. but lame app, anyway. lame rants by blokes who don’t even edit for a living. lame rants by blokes who feel all grownup with temper tantrums against baaad apple. sheesh. be careful in your little playgroud, kids. 2003-07-07 12:10 pm The 3% you guys toss around is a useless number in this context. Sales of Mac software, last time I looked, amount to something like 40% of Adobe’s sales. But hey, that’s only 37% difference, maybe y’all are rounding… 2003-07-07 12:18 pm First, shake is a video compositing apps. Not and audio composition as I’ve read. Do you really know about what you are talking? For Avid… most of their software and hardware only run on PC. Hard to read, but true. As an artist I know a lot of possibilities to composite video – shake is good, but it’s not the better. We have 4 or 5 big compositing apps on wintel platform, and the big one are still on SGI computer (who can previz 4k video with effect and so on… no other computer do that). For the Wintel hardware, most of the time it work. But hey, everyone is prone to have some problem? Do you know how many peripheral there are for PC? Compatibility is bound to happen, since nothing is perfect. G4 have their problem at the beginning, do you remember some of them burning their tower? Stop kidding here, we don’t have only one motherboard nor one or two cpu possible. On my old asus motherboard I can replace my 1.2ghz athlon by a 2.2ghz Athlon XP one for example… that’s a lot of CPU I can put on it, and it work. I can nearly change all peripheral and it’s still work. You don’t have that choice on your Mac, and if there a problem with your so tested hardware with the nearly only solution you have, herrm, it’s a shame. And yeah Apple use mostly wintel component inside is computer : DDR ram, HyperTransport bus(AMD), Serial Ata, USB, PCI X(Hello Intel), and so on. Apple didn’t do either himself his processor : Power4, hello IBM… Nearly the only piece of hardware who’s not on Wintel But I still think that I want a G5 to work on it. I only need Painter and Photoshop after all, and some usefull apps to listen to my MP3, browsing the web, view my email and some times write a thing or two :p 2003-07-07 12:19 pm syntrillium’s audition (cool edit pro) is windows only and has been windows only since about 1994-5. Their founder was a microsoft programmer. That not a pare down in support. How would news.com expect adobe to port cool edit pro to apple in one week. they just purchased syntrillium last week you know. I loathe cr*p like this. Get your story straight news.com. There are too many journalists outfits that lack professionalim and accuracy. News.com is just one of many. Accurate information that is a journalists job, though one few follow. And I will add this. Cool edit pro, audition, is good but its not up to wavelab from steinberg or peak from bias. The TC works audio editor, which i have never tried, spark is also supposed to be better. The last three are available for apple OS X. If adobe put that package out in the mac world they’d impress no one. maybe that is why it is PC only. Meaning a better caption for the story should be “adobe can’t compete in apple space runs scared to PC land.” 2003-07-07 12:30 pm Interesting how all the Macinistas — who are nothing more than puppets on Job’s string — say “we don’t need Adobe; they were always junk to begin with; any software Apple writes is much better…” and so on ad nauseum. Yet I recall distinctly the days when Macinistas touted Adobe products as one of the best things about owning a Mac. 2003-07-07 12:31 pm Lets be honest, in all of my time using Premiere 6.0 and Final Cut Pro, I feel that Premiere can’t even come close in terms of usability. Does anyone know someone who owns a Mac and uses Premiere as their editing solution of choice? Maybe a few exceptions here and there, but why dump effort into Mac software that no one really uses? Overall, this makes sense to me. Apple seems happy not to depend on 3rd party software, so it makes sense for 3rd party software makers to look elsewhere. This isn’t everyone screwing OS X, this is Apple making it not viable for certain 3rd party software houses to maintain their product. 2003-07-07 12:43 pm I can’t think of Adobe or low/mid end software maker dropping Apple for Linux now. If it doesn’t make sense to support one hardware/OS architecture that represents 3% of the market, how would it make sense to support Linux, when there are so many distros and that’s there is very little marketing data available on who uses what on the desktop ? If you add to that the packaging problem and library variations between distros and distro versions, it looks really scary. Let alone that a lot of the software ground is covered by commodity open source apps. Even if they usually are not as well finished/polished as commercial apps, they make it harder for those to appear worth the spend. So the economics of linux consumer commercial software look desperately doomed to me. 2003-07-07 12:58 pm If Apple is irrelevant to you, why do you spend 5 minutes of your day trying to explain to people that it is irrelevant to you? People are just as fanatical about Amiga and Star Trek for that matter, but I don’t 100+ posts on every Amiga topic where people are denouncing something about Amiga because it is irrelevant to them. If it was irrelevant why are people so interested? Why not leave the mac fanatics to themselves? I think it’s because Apple is a lot more relevant than you claim. For a 3% marketshare Apple seems to have a 90% media share. “What does infuriate non-Mac users is the zealotry. I am sick of hearing that wintel hardware is junk and XP crashes constantly.” If you didn’t bother to read the articles here you wouldn’t hear that all the time. Just try to filter out anything related to a Mac anywhere, because even in magazines like “PC Magazine” you’ll find reviews claiming MacOS X crashes less than XP and if you want to see a preview of Longhorn, check out OS X 10.3. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,96660,00.asp http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,810846,00.asp http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1134748,00.asp http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,4248,1140091,00.asp “Apple’s paving the way for where Microsoft will go with its ‘Longhorn’ client in 2005.” – Quote from the last above link “Adobe is moving from Mac because it is percieved as an unprofitable, dying platform not because it can’t compete with Final Cut.” You sound like a perpetual pessimist, which is what really furiates us. If we’re so irrelevant why do you bother to make such ridiculous statements? You’re the reason there’s mac zealots. It takes controversy and adversity to make people care about something so much. In regard to your statement: first, Apple has been dying now for the past 27 years. So I think they have pretty good experience at not dying. Everyone had them dead by 1997 for sure in 1995. If the Mac was such a dying platform, then Quark wouldn’t have just been ported completely over to Cocoa, and Adobe wouldn’t still be releasing products like Photoshop and Illustrator for it. The choice of Adobe not to release Premiere is based solely on the fact that it wouldn’t be cost effective to compete against Apple’s Final Cut Pro 4, Shake, Logic, and DVD Studio Pro. Apple does it all for the Mac platform, with the industry’s best software and extremely low prices. Nothingreal used to make Shake and sold it for $25,000. Apple bought Nothingreal (www.nothingreal.com), killed the Windows version, and now sells it on the Mac for $4,950. This is the same software that brings you those cool effects in your favorite movies like Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, The Matrix Reloaded, X-Men 2, etc. Why would Adobe try to compete against that, especially when Apple also offers Final Cut Pro Express for $299, and gives iMovie away for free for people with a Mac? Apple owns the Professional Digital Production market. http://www.apple.com/shake/ 2003-07-07 1:05 pm I hate it when people just don’t read the article. To quote, “David Trescot, senior director of Adobe’s digital video products group, said the new edition of Premiere is a complete rewrite of the application” In other words, this isn’t like the older versions of Premier. Have you use the new version of Premier? Have any other Machead touting Final Cut Pro used the new version of Premier? If no, then I don’t think you should be advocating Final Cut Pro/ Express. I’m not saying the new version of Premier is better than FCP, but it might be. I personally won’t have any clue, I don’t do video. Now, you also can’t say that this is just vapourware that can’t be compared with FCP. True, this new version haven’t come out. But then again, the article isn’t about the market condition now rather later. 2003-07-07 1:12 pm I don’t know. But, bear in mind that commercial software tends not to have many dependencies. Regardless, Linux is growing. They are probably just hedging their bets, especially as it’s so easy. 2003-07-07 1:29 pm what happened here is simple. Adobe buys company last week that makes PC product only (syntrillium). Cool edit has never been available for apple. EVer. This week they make use of that new asset by introducing a package with a product that they already said would not support apple. News.com spins it as lack of support for apple. There were far more accurate headlines like adobe takes advantage of syntrillium package adobe uses acqusition to gain share in PC a/v Adobe can’t cut it with final cut runs to PC shelter instead its spun as apple support wanes. If you think that is pro news or even accurate then i encourage you to keep on the blinders and keep watching fox news. 2003-07-07 1:33 pm News.com makes an evaluation for you in the headline. Adobe pares MAC support. Real journalists don’t put evaluations in the headline. They are making a conclusion for you. Report the facts not your own silly conclusions and push up your standard of journalism News.com. 2003-07-07 1:35 pm The windows version of shake is dead right, and Apple now sell it far cheaper than before ($20,000) it seems (you could buy a couple of G5’s with such a price drop with ample helpings and bells and whistles). But they have already ported it to linux as well havn’t they? When i read up about shake, i see the OSX, UNIX and Linux versions being available. Its interesting to note really when somebody asked before in this thread whether adobe would port their software to linux while Apple already has in some ways. I would also be interested to know whether it is PPC and x86 they ported it to as well. 2003-07-07 1:47 pm “Shake 3 is also available for Linux and IRIX for a suggested retail price of $9,900 (US) with an annual maintenance of $1485 (US). Render-only versions of Shake 3 are free on Mac OS X and are available for Linux and IRIX for a suggested retail price of $3,900 (US) with an annual maintenance of $585 (US).” from: http://www.apple.com/shake 2003-07-07 1:55 pm Forgot to mention: Shake used to sell for over $20,000 Shake sells for MacOS X for $4,950 Shake suggested retail price for Linux is $9,900 Render-only version of Shake is free on MacOS X Render-only version of Shake is suggested at $3,900 for Linux Now, I’m sure Apple cuts professional shops a better deal if they use render-only Linux (or IRIX) versions of Shake, although to buy it you have to contact an Apple Professioanl Film Reseller (the reason ony suggested prices are listed for Linux). This is a case though where the software costs more than the hardware. If you want to use Shake it would be more cost effective to use a Mac than Linux. Although I’m willing to bet render farms use mainly Linux and IRIX with render-only versions of Shake for a lot less than the suggested price, and use Macs on the development side. This is a situation where Linux and Macs complement each other nicely. 2003-07-07 2:05 pm I can’t say I hate Macs *now*, as I haven’t used one in years. Back in 1993, when I entered the working world fresh out of high school as a salesperson I took the Mac on head to head. At Sears, the store I worked at, we had two Mac computers for sale, the Performa series if memory serves. The following are the three major things that soured my view of Apple, which happen to be similar views of various people I know: 1) Software Available at Retail: Even today, finding Mac software is difficult. Back in say 1994 Wal-Mart and Sears carried the software but in limited quantities. At Wal-Mart there was an actual 4 foot section with like 3 to 4 shelves devoted to Mac. At Sears there was usually one or two 4 foot shelves. Yet I knew it was only a fraction of what was out there. The most often said phrase Mac users spoke was “Oh, just buy from the Mac catalog (Mac Warehouse? Been a while).” People, at least in my neck o’ the woods, wanted the software available without having to drive long distances or having to dial a phone number. Eventually Mac software was taken out by our software vendor. 2)Fixablity: Now this is probably coming from inexperience with a Mac at the time, but when our demo Macs hung-they hung BAD. They were locked down so no customer could screw it up, just eventually the demo software would bug out and the system would crash. When the system crashed, there was no “back door” as it were to try and fix things from a command line ala the DOS/Windows connection. When Windows horked up, I just checked out an INI file or removed an offending EXE file. Didn’t have that ability in Mac and when we sold the demo machines I’d have to completely reinstall the OS to remove the demo. 3)Zealotry: I found IBM PC Compatibles great. Had all the software I needed, was easy to upgrade (with parts available everywhere) and were fairly inexpensive. Customers knew what they wanted, but were never sure of the platform. After identifying their needs and wants the desire usually landed on a PC platform. Every once in a while a Mac-head would jump into my sale and would verbally trounce me and said how I should be trying to sell the Mac, “clearly the superior machine”. Or they would come in and totally bad mouth our PC stock or bad mouth our lack of Mac support. It drove me nuts. That was pretty much my views then. I’ve left my jadedness behind as I see PCs as a tool or an entertainment device as the need arose and not as a religion or a “way of life”. Now I just don’t use Macs as they are too expensive when I can do the same things on the PC for hundreds less. 2003-07-07 2:12 pm of the new machines being sold. The installed Macintosh user base is probably bigger than that. I think that the actual number is around 15 ~ 20%. 2003-07-07 2:15 pm ..the Indesign / Quark Express issue is a very different one than the Premiere / Final Cut one …in the case of Premiere Adobe already has dominace on the Windows platform it is only looking to maintain and extend its dominace. However, marketshare is the main issue in the InDesign / Express battle…In this case,Adobe is the underdog..it therfore needs to get onto as many desktops as possible in order to become the dominante player.Since the Apple platform is very much alive in the publising world,Adobe need to make converts and achive critical mass on the desktop publishing front..this is not an issue for Premiere. …..the fact that Adobe did not develop a version of PhotoShop Album for the Mac platform was a sign of things to come…Apple is playing with fire! 2003-07-07 2:23 pm Sorry, but this is crap. We are talking of the video market, not the overall market. Final Cut Pro alone had about 30% marketshare last year, Premiere 53% (source:geek.com). Since then, the FCP market share has risen. So Apple has hardly only 3% of the video market, but has to have more than 35% – FCP only runs on the Mac and out of the 53% marketshare of Premiere, about 10% are Macs – this is what Adobe has said. So if Adobe is going to leave the Mac market, this has nothing to do with 3% market share or installed base. Of course it absolutely makes sense for Adobe not to mention FCP, since when people think the Mac would be dead and buy PCs, FCP is no longer an option for them and Adobe has good chances to sell Premiere. 2003-07-07 2:30 pm Adobe can produce their own *nix distro (probably BSD based for licensing purposes) and bundle it with their products if they choose. It only has to support a very limited range of hardware and Adobe software. Basically a psuedo “Mac” on commodity wintel hardware. The advantage is a very highly optimized software/hardware bundle. 2003-07-07 2:40 pm Thanks for the links, makes me look more credible now! I tried looking myself but i could only find the OSX version of Shake. 2003-07-07 2:48 pm As a long time user (IIe and IBM PC days) of computers and related technologies, I cannot understand why people need to stick their heads in the sand and pretend to ignore the basics of a market driven economy and its’ effects on the tech-world. Platforms, system underpinnings, peripheral options and general standards have ebbed and flowed since the earliest days…and some outstanding ‘choices’ simply run their course and die as a result of market competition…a great example is the battle won by Iomega v. other backup devices. The market has always driven change in technology…and just because someone has a better product doesn’t mean that huge sales are guaranteed…just look at Betamax. Folks…it is ok to use different platforms (I use and foster the growth of the 3 ‘currently’ biggest ones everyday in my job…Windows, Mac and Linux). Choice and the freedom to steer technology is what drives innovation and stirs the imagination of the developer, business person and end user. Today we have X-Y-Z choices…and 10 years from now we will have something totally different. What were you using 10 years ago? What do you use now? The central question you should ask is…’does the technology do what you need?’. Are you happy with today’s choices? How can you participate in helping to bring new changes that you want to see? We will always have emerging technologies that shift the dynamics of the market and ultimately the user base. There will always be upgrades. This happens in other sectors of our lives…autos, appliances, etc…etc..etc. Short of a total 1984 style scenario, we will always have choices…regardless of total market share. Does your choice (or choices) work for you? That’s what really matters…do the research, spend your money wisely and enjoy your choice. Cheers! 2003-07-07 2:52 pm I would think that Apple computer would be paying other companies to port their software to MacOSX. Having a very large company that has a history of supporting Macintosh dumps a product on the Macintosh platform, that is a very serious concern. Regardless of the merit of the product, limiting choices of consumers will inevitably be bad for MacOSX. If Apple was smart then they would be pushing to port MacOSX to Intel x86, x86-64, Itanium, SPARC, MIPS, and any other piece of hardware on the planet. Then make sure that they LOSE tons of money just getting software ported to OSX, even if by bribes! If the operating system is so strong and irresistable, why not unleash it on the world and have it take on Windows head on, instead of skulking in a little mini-vaccuum. The FIRST thing Apple should do is stop making hardware, morons… their hardware is nothing special… let IBM make your PCs and ramp up so you can lower the cost… once again, lose some money to actually have some growth, instead of jumping over dollars to pick up pennies. Every company lately is SO concerend about quarterly profits, it seems as if they could care less if they will be around in two years. Stupid long term business solutions so the CEO can get a fat bonus and the shareholders can smile, this quarter. I wonder who next will outsource their entire IT staff to India, because their profits will go up, this quarter. 2003-07-07 3:09 pm For a company that many are saying have 3% or less of marketshare it sure grabs 95% of the attention of OSNews readers. Just an observation anyway. I see on other sites like /. as well. I think that Adobe not making Premiere for Mac is a good business decison for them. FCP on Mac evolves at a faster rate and FCP is well regarded in the industry and among Mac users so it is a losing battle. I have seen Apple churn out software when they are not satisfied with offerings from software vendors. I think that mindset of doing the job yourself because no one can do it better is fine. I am sure that if Adobe decided to kill Photoshop on Mac Apple would have a response to that as well. Generally this is a business decision and it makes perfect sense. Things would be more interesting if Apple ported FCP to PC but that wouldn’t make sense other than to compete and infuriate Adobe. 2003-07-07 3:15 pm Adobe has no reason to continue Premiere for Mac because Apple has been pushing FCP for video editing and there is no way for Premiere to coexist or compete. For PC, Premiere is still a viable option between highend consumer NLE (Avid Xpress) and all the home video junks (e.g. MS moviemaker) in the market. In broadcast, Avid remains as the standard. Apple’s vertical integration of hardware, OS and applications may further discourage other software vendors and developers to develop applications run on Mac OS. If you love Apple, Mac offers exactly what you want. But if one of your favorite applications run only on PC, you have no luck. The way Apple is running their business can be very powerful if Mac is dominant in the market, but with 3-5% of market share, vertical integration may hurt Apple’s growth and survival. 2003-07-07 3:25 pm RE: rajan r I hate it when people just don’t read the article. To quote, “David Trescot, senior director of Adobe’s digital video products group, said the new edition of Premiere is a complete rewrite of the application”… … Now, you also can’t say that this is just vapourware that can’t be compared with FCP Yeah, rewritten for the PC. This matters, why? You’re going to compare PC-only software to Mac-only software? That’s good. Let’s see how Macs perform against a long distance runner, or perhaps see how they do against Mike Tyson in the ring. RE: ArisT At Sears, the store I worked at, we had two Mac computers for sale, the Performa series if memory serves Well, those were bad times for Apple and that Performa was pretty much junk. If it is all you knew of Macs then it wasn’t even worth mentioning. Things are a lot different now – it’s not the same computer you used by any stretch of the imagination. Sears was a nightmare for Apple PR and as a venture in retail sales it was useless. Never did I see the computers in working order, and the sales staff was clueless. The whole debacle was part of that disoriented post-Jobs era of Apple. 2003-07-07 3:28 pm What were you using 10 years ago? 10 years ago my parents had just ‘switched’ from the Apple IIgs to the IBM PC (4×86) using MS-DOS, because the games available for the Apple had continued to thin out, and the PC had Wolf3d and Doom (and Doom 2, and numerous other games). Also, there was the little thing with the fact that my parents really needed something that could run the same version of WordPerfect and Excel that they used at work, and a few other pieces of software, as well, and SCSI hard drives were(are) a lot more expensive than IDE hard drives (and IDE was starting to close the performance gap slightly). What do you use now? It depends on what I’m doing. Most of my games are on consoles, though I still have a lot of games on the PC (including Doom, though I don’t play that much any more). For the most part my PC runs Office, Visual Studio, and a handful of other things. No, I can’t use a Mac for everything I do on my computer, but yes, there is room for a Mac in my home (unfortunately, there isn’t room in my checkbook right now for a Mac, or any other new computer, though occasional computer parts do fit). There is, of course, a second computer sitting in the living room waiting for me to find time to set it up. I haven’t decided yet whether it will be a second computer for my gf to use for her homework, or if I will set it up as a ‘media PC’ hooked up to the network, the TV, and the stereo, to host all of the MP3 and video files currently stored on my main PC (no, I don’t want to buy a CD player that can hold all of my CDs, even if there were one available that could send the audio over a network to my computers). Then there’s the router, and hopefully most people know by now that you should probably use OpenBSD for something like that, but I guess some people like the ability to run a Linux router off a floppy disk. The central question you should ask is…’does the technology do what you need?’. Are you happy with today’s choices? How can you participate in helping to bring new changes that you want to see? The only way I see that I can really participate in bringing the changes I want to see is to continue stating that the Mac is too expensive for me only because I can’t space out the cost without buying it on credit or setting the money aside over time. I’ve never bought a computer all at once, and I never will. My father bought the Apple IIgs on credit, but even then he got a better price on it then he could get on a comparable (compared to what else was/is available from Apple) Mac today (in other words, the price of the Apple IIgs then was better compared to other Apple computers than any Mac he (or I) could buy today). If I could buy the case and motherboard today, the CD/DVD and hard drives in 2 weeks, the operating system 2 weeks later, the monitor 2 weeks from then (getting the pattern yet?), and so on, then I could justify buying a Mac, just as easily as I can justify buying a PC. Then I would be happy with today’s choices. Does the technology do what I need? Not any better than what I already have. Does it do something I want? Maybe slightly better than what I already have (because slightly more audio editingcomposition software is available for the Mac, though the gap is closing fast on the Windows side). I could go to 100% console gaming and not really miss a whole lot right now, but it really doesn’t take much to keep a Windows computer up to date as a gaming platform, either (a new video card every 12-18 months, a new CPU/motherboard/RAM every 24 months, maybe a RAM or CPU upgrade every 12 months, a hard drive upgrade every time both hard drives are full, which is maybe every 18 months), and that drives the upgrades of the non-gaming (and occasionally non-Windows) computers in my home, as well. 2003-07-07 3:59 pm I use FCP on my Mac and Adobe premire on my PC. In my opinion. They both are just about the same feature wise. Why run Adobe Premire on your Mac when Final cut pro is being developed a million times faster. This doesnt suprise me at all. Mac Video pros shouldnt worry about this at all. If Adobe drops After Effects for the Mac, Thats when its all over. 2003-07-07 4:57 pm Who the hell is Avid then? Final Cut Pro competes with Avid. Final Cut Express competed with Premiere. iMovie is just what every newbie video-phile needs to learn the ropes. Adobe? Who uses Premiere anyway? 2003-07-07 5:08 pm Final Cut Express competed with Premiere. Are you Talking about the Mac version of Premire? Because the Windows version of Premire is much higher end then Final Cut Express. I use the Windows version of Premire Everyday. Its a great editing program. I cant wait for the new version. If you want to argue Final Cut -vs- Premire on just the Mac, then I’d have to say that Final Cut would Win. 2003-07-07 5:14 pm I run Premiere 6.5 and Final Cut Pro 3 on OS X. And I’ll tell you what- Premiere BLOWS. Like you wouldn’t BELIEVE. Never mind the fact that it takes six times as long to start up. People bitch about Apple buying software companies, axing windows versions, releasing the better or more current version of the software for MacOS only, and for making “anti-competetive” software. Who’d use another mp3 player when there’s iTunes? Who’d bother with Premiere when there’s FCP? Nobody, unless the competitor actually has a better product. And you’ll find that in the areas where Apple is offering software, the software they offer is the best on the platform. Apple has an interesting habit of fixing gaping holes in MacOS software offerings with superior work at a better price- which is proof that if you want something done right, you need to do it yourself. Premiere has ALWAYS sucked rocks. Even when it was the only game in town that ran in software- it’s no wonder there were lines and waiting lists for the Media100 and AVID labs (realtime video on Apple hardware with hardware accellerator cards) at school when EVERY machine had Premiere installed. The app takes forever to load up, runs poorly, is extremely unstable, steals focus in OS X (RAGE!!!!), and is handily beaten by iMovie for most things, and FCP for the rest. The only area in which Adobe is even remotely competetive when it comes to video is After Effects- the workflow that application has just blows everything else I’ve ever used out of the water. I wish more programs handled like AE. 🙂 (batch rendering and sub compositions, largely). But for video editing? They’ve been a JOKE for YEARS. I won’t miss them. 2003-07-07 5:36 pm I don’t spend much time reading about software for industries outside of my own so forgive me if this seems obtuse… The line “another high-profile defection from Apple Computer’s Macintosh operating system” made me think, huh?! Is this FUD? I recall MS stating that they are dropping IE for Mac, but that is becuase they are dropping ALL IE development and further integrating it into Windows. Good riddance. To be honest, my expereince (in the sciences) has shown the opposite trend with applications like Mathmatica coming BACK to the Mac or being ported to it for the first time. I’d appreciate it if somebody who keeps track of these sorts of things were to post a list of “high profile” vendors dropping support for Mac OS X. I’ll also attempt to ask the same question of the article’s author and report back here what I get, if anything. 2003-07-07 5:57 pm For one I am an Final cut editor. Premiere is to cumbersome(6 and 6.5 was). Matter of fact Premiere 6.5 wasn’t written well for OS X, it ran very sloppy and slow compared to Final Cut Pro and Express. So it goes back to Adobe they just needed to write a better product for Mac OS. Its sad the Adobe lost the market to thier “old” developement which was and is Final Cut Pro. So Adobe is the loser, not mac customers. I hope they have wrote a better Premiere then the last ones. Because the learning curve was to high compared to other more powerful programs, such as Final Cut. 2003-07-07 6:04 pm “If Adobe drops After Effects for the Mac, Thats when its all over”. Have you forgot about Combustion with is a higher end program for Win and OS X. I think its made by the same company that makes 3d studio max. It looks like a great alternive or an addition to After Effects. 2003-07-07 6:05 pm Anonymous (IP: —.tpgi.com.au) wrote Adobe is a much bigger corporation than Apple. Apple doesn’t even post it’s financials on its website. According to who??? From each companies web site: Adobe (May 30) 320.1 million (or .3201 billion) http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/invrelations/main.html Apple (March 29) 1.475 billion http://www.apple.com/investor/ Seems to me that Apple is over 4.5% larger than Adobe, but maybe that’s just my ‘zelotry’. 2003-07-07 6:12 pm Speaking as a former media designer (now a journalist – boo, hiss etc.)… 1. Priemer is NOT high end, on either Mac or Win. Mid range. We used it once upon a time for ‘multimedia’ video (movs and mpegs for Director Projectors) and for S-VHS, Hi8 and lower stuff. Anything at broadcast quality (high band U-Matic, DV or BetaCam) was (then) done on Avid, now on FCP. Just my experience. After Effects isn’t high end either, but we used it because way back then Shake was Irix only and tremendously expensive – arguably still is for a small time production company. As our SGI equipment consisted of an Indy and an Indigo 2 (plus an occassionally leased o2) it wasn’t happening. (Before that we did assemble editing using a couple of high end VCRs, a vision mixing desk and a lot of coffee – my life in hell.) Anyway as an aside, Premier was REALLY ropey on Irix. As far as I could tell it was the Mac OS app wrapped up in emulation (or molases, hard to say). It made SGI o2s look like a Mac Centris. Shameful. Shame to see it go though. Oh well. 2. Just a question. What is a exactly computer? People talka bout ‘upgrading’ their PCs, but surely if you change the motherboard and processor and add more disks it’s actually a new computer? Short of drop-in motherboard replacments the Mac seems more upgardable to me, given the popularity of CPU upgrades. I suppose it depends what you mean by upgrade. No matter, just a thought. 3. RE Adobe UNIX – not likely, but I’d buy it. I also wish they’d bring back Photoshop, Illustrator and Framemaker for Irix as I’m now in possession of the two afforementioned SGIs and am at a loss as to what to do with them. Nice 20″ Sony GDM tubes though. PS In case you’re wondering, a ‘Media Designer’ was a riciculous title given to graphic designer who were forced, at near gunpoint, to learn animation, Lingo and on-line/off-line NLE. 2003-07-07 6:30 pm “Are you Talking about the Mac version of Premire? Because the Windows version of Premire is much higher end then Final Cut Express. I use the Windows version of Premire Everyday. Its a great editing program. I cant wait for the new version”. Like are you telling us that Adobe 6 or 6.5 on Windows was superior than the Mac plateform. YOu have to be kidding or not well school in your thought. Until Premiere 5, premiere was ahead on the Mac plateform then on windows. It wasn’t equal, because Adobe put more effort on the Mac side than windows. And Yes 150 dollar(edu user)Final Cut Epress is higher end then Premiere 6.5 was or equal. Try it look at the features and then tell me. Its so funny, kinda sad to that Adobe seems so defensive and jealous of Apple in thier interviews. “Yup it’s a business decision”, Well adobe! What about your customers! Can you just be honest and say that Premiere sales have sunk, even on Windows because of competion from Video Vegas and other more friendly programs. Sounds like Adobe is going to start screwing over more than just thier mac customers now. 2003-07-07 6:32 pm Jon Dough: Interesting how all the Macinistas ? who are nothing more than puppets on Job’s string ? say “we don’t need Adobe; they were always junk to begin with; any software Apple writes is much better…” I don’t think anyone is saying that Adobe’s products are unilaterally bad. Premiere is simply a toy compared to Final Cut Pro, just as PageMill is a toy compared to Dreamweaver and Streamline is a toy compared to Corel Trace. Adobe has a highly diversified product line, and is competing in areas in which their competators are selling clearly superior software. Adobe has some excellent products which will not be leaving the Mac platform any time soon, such as Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign. I think one thing that is clear from the comments on this article is that no one used Premiere on Mac. Thus, Adobe dropping support for it isn’t that unexpected. rajan r: I hate it when people just don’t read the article. To quote, “David Trescot, senior director of Adobe’s digital video products group, said the new edition of Premiere is a complete rewrite of the application” In other words, this isn’t like the older versions of Premier. For starters, the name of the application is “Premiere” However, I suggest you read this Joel on Software article: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html If Premiere is already lacking in features in comparison to Final Cut Pro, how is starting from scratch going to help? All new code means all new bugs, all new regression testing, and means resolving thousands of problems that were already solved in the past. Now, I will give Adobe a little credit as they have pulled this off in the past with InDesign. InDesign is an excellent application, especially in comparison to PageMaker. However, what publishing houses have you seen drop PageMaker for InDesign? Have you use the new version of Premier? Have any other Machead touting Final Cut Pro used the new version of Premier? If no, then I don’t think you should be advocating Final Cut Pro/ Express. I’m not saying the new version of Premier is better than FCP, but it might be. The only thing we have to go on in regards to the new version of Premiere is that it is all new code. If history has anything to say about the first release of a product based on all new code, it will be that it lacks many features of the original while introducing many new bugs. Just look at OS X (which was still based on legacy code) Now, you also can’t say that this is just vapourware that can’t be compared with FCP. Yes, I can. There’s nothing to compare it to because it’s completely intangible. True, this new version haven’t come out. But then again, the article isn’t about the market condition now rather later. I will happily compare the respective virtues and vices of the new Premiere versus Final Cut Pro following the release, however for the time being Final Cut Pro is quite obviously the superior product. 2003-07-07 6:44 pm > For starters, the name of the application is “Premiere” Thank god, I thought it was just me. I went the whole way through my post Americanising it to ‘Premier’ just so I wouldn’t get flamed. I wish I could go back an re-translate into Englsih. 2003-07-07 7:59 pm I’m so glad your a walking dictionary. 2003-07-07 8:12 pm > Everything anti-apple zealots say get persons such as > what I said. It seems that everyone wants macs but 95% > are too cheap-ass poverty stricken to afford one. Cry me > a bloody river because I certainly don’t feel guilty > being in the top 5%. Why should anyone pay more, when they can pay less and get more 🙂 2003-07-07 8:29 pm Exactly, iMovie is just to much competition for Adobe. 2003-07-07 8:35 pm yup buy an overpriced mac and make your own movie with pre-installed software, burn it with pre-installed software. Adobe just has to much of a problem with that. Heck they are the one competing with Apple now. Why did thay have to aquire thier own dvd burning software, when 3rd party apps already existed on the market on the windows side. Look whose the one competing. It’s Adobe. 2003-07-07 9:20 pm < Could it be that we will see more apps ported to Linux rather than to OS X? I can assure you, if Adobe doesn’t care as much for the Apple platform, they care way less for the Linux one… > Actually Adobe goes where there is demand, if the Linux platform grows enough and there is more demand, I think you will see much more linux support, Adobe has gone to developing their apps in QT so ports to other platforms will not be that hard. In my opinion tho, if Apple was to try to do a Image Editing App, then I think they would be in trouble. Because businesses and graphics artists love Photoshop, and if Photoshop was to get cut, only the few Apple loyalists would stay with Apple. It would take away incentives to adopt Apple 2003-07-07 10:08 pm Its sad the Adobe lost the market to thier “old” developement which was and is Final Cut Pro. I’m not sure if it’s what you meant, but I believe Final Cut was developed by Macromedia before being acquired by Apple. Apple certainly ran with the ball though. 2003-07-07 11:56 pm Premiere developement team or part of them left to Macromedia developed Final Cut and Apple picked them up. That’s the way I’ve heard it and that Premiere is a sister App to Final Cut Pro. 2003-07-08 1:12 am Fair enough. It was still made by Macromedia to be a product for Macromedia. The software industry can be pretty close-knit so it doesn’t surprise me if there were ex-Adobe employees in the fold. 2003-07-08 3:32 pm Yup it happens all the time, because lately there were Adobe people leaving for Apple. At least one higher up person that I know of.