Operating Systems > macOS

Adobe can suck my cock: problem number 234,897,456

(1/6) > >>

worker201:
Adobe Illustrator (and Photoshop and InDesign) doesn't support Intel Macs.

WHY?


Adobe has thousands of programmers, buckets of cash, and a stranglehold on the graphics application market.  So what the fuck is their excuse for this latest joke?  Applications that are only sorta ported to the Mac platform work better than Illustrator CS1 on my MacBookPro.  So if the Mplayer group can throw zero dollars at their OSX version of mplayer can make it work just fine, and Adobe can throw zero dollars at the problem and get nothing done at all, what am I to think?

What's even more irritating is that I was looking over the panic logs, and Illustrator CS1 (released Oct 2003) was using all Carbon libraries, instead of Cocoa libraries.  What the fuck is that about?  Why are they developing workhorse apps that are designed to work in pre-OSX environments?  In Tiger, Carbon apps run in emulation mode, and will eventually be phased out (don't expect Carbon support in OSX 10.5).  So those of us who have Intel-Macs get screwed until summer 2007, when CS3 comes out.

Probably the problem is this: some divergent anti-cooperation from Adobe and Apple.  Apple wants to get rid of its Classic/Carbon heritage and get everyone to upgrade to new hardware and software.  While Adobe is trying to milk all the cash they can from the graphics pros who are still using OS8 (a surprising number of people).  Well, that's how it goes when your life is dependent on corporations for computational validation.  Nobody wins.

And before anybody says "Duh, use Linux", let me remind you that there are STILL no decent vector graphics programs for Linux.  Probably because nobody wants to agree with the license restrictions of PostScript or PDF, extraordinary and advanced graphics formats.  As far as I can tell, the restrictions only require you to mention Adobe in your source code, so I don't see what the big deal is.  But fuck, since I can't program a graphics application of my own, then I guess I can't complain about Linux's lack.  Instead, I am forced to complain about the way corporate applications suck ass.

Thanks for your time.

Laukev7:
This really should go in the Mac OS section.

adiment:
Sucks.

You should try PS7.0/I6.0 and see how that works. CS1/2 have a lot of CPU optimizations (64-bit, dual-core, etc). You have a better chance of that actually working... maybe adobe has a patch planned? (yeah right)

however that is the cost you pay when you buy something that's "cutting-edge" new. I just ordered my friend a brand new rig with an AM2 and 7900GT KO SLI, and after updating the mobo's bios the nv570 chipset stopped letting me use SLI. There goes $350.00 until there's a BIOS update. (Considering that it's ASUS, that update won't happen)

worker201:
As a follow-up, I read this interesting bit from Adobe:
http://www.adobe.com/products/pdfs/intelmacsupport.pdf

Supposedly, CS2 works under Rosetta, Apple's own PPC-to-Intel translator.  Causes a serious slowdown, but they claim it is fully functional and bug-free.  Of course that's another couple hundred dollars to Adobe for a product that is only supported in emulation mode!

Once again, I would like to point out that no other software packages that I know of are having a hard time transitioning to the Intel-Macs.  My favorite word processor, Mariner Write, came out with universal binaries a couple weeks ago - even though the old version worked just fine.  It seems like only Adobe is having this problem, which is what makes me mad about it.  According to the above document, they are simply being stubborn, not wanting to interrupt their 18-24 month product cycle.

Guess I am going to have to hold onto my G3 a bit longer than I planned.

sjor:
Adobe did say that they are working on a Universal version of their apps, so you're gonna have to be patient.
Also if you think about it, Photoshop & Illustrator has been programmed for PPC since it started. And because of how it's built, they cannot do a straight forward conversion. They have to build it from scratch, but they've got another problem: Apple's Xcode tools are inadequate for building something like the CS suite, and they're about the only thing you can use to build universal apps.
A simpler app would be easier and quicker to convert. The CS suite is not simple. If you give them a bit of time, they'll release one.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page