Filed under: Software, Universal Binary
Photoshop not Universal until next version?
Our very own David Chartier has posted on the Unofficial Photoshop
Weblog that there are rumors that Adobe
has no plans to make their current offerings into Universal applications (ones that run natively on both PowerPC and
Intel based Macs). If this is true, and at the moment this is pure conjecture, then that would mean Photoshop pros will
need to pony up the cash for the upgrade if they want to run Photoshop on an Intel Mac. It is a given that most
Photoshop pros would upgrade anyway, so the real let down is the length of time that we would have to wait for the
upgrade to come around.Let's hope this rumor is just that, and Adobe is feverishly working on a free (a boy can dream, right?) update to their CS2 apps that will make them Universal applications.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
kuwan said 2:54PM on 1-20-2006
Don't expect anything until the next version. Photoshop is one of those apps that is hit hardest by the transition. Probably built with CodeWarrior so they first have to move to Xcode, contains lots of Altivec code, very likely there are a lot of endian issues due to its image processing nature. This is a big, big undertaking by Adobe so don't expect some miracle flip of the switch to get a Universal Binary for Photoshop.
Yeah, I know there are those of you that are saying that they probably already have SSE code where they have Altivec code, but depending on how it is implemented there could be many problems. For example the assembly formats for Xcode and whatever they use on Windows (likely Visual Studio) are different, so the assembly would have to be modified or rewritten. If they use the SSE intrinsics then there may not be problems, but given the age of Photoshop I'd be surprised if there isn't a lot of x86 assembly lying around.
I wouldn't expect a Universal Photoshop for a while, certainly not until the next version.
Reply
jc said 2:54PM on 1-20-2006
Until the PowerMac is upgraded, I don't see a need for a universal binary of Photoshop.
The G5 quad should be more than enough to tie anyone over that needs to use Photoshop at a professional level. The rest of us are not really going to suffer that much with rosetta.
Reply
Wheels said 3:32PM on 1-20-2006
Technical issues aside, do you think that Adobe might be digging their heals in a little more after the little offhanded slam Jobs made about photoshop always taking forever to load? I mean, that might tick me off a little bit if I were Adobe.
Reply
Tony said 3:37PM on 1-20-2006
I believe it was pointed out (maybe on this site, as well as others) that most pro apps like Photoshop would require a paid upgrade. It's not really a surprise.
Reply
Jarrod Turner said 3:47PM on 1-20-2006
I thought the load time joke was actually really funny, just a jab at technology in general. Aperture takes some time to load too, even on a quad. If I was Adobe, I'd just laugh at that.
Reply
Joshua Ochs said 4:01PM on 1-20-2006
Not only is there the complexity involved, but Adobe is probably on chilly terms with Apple right now, due to Aperture and other moves into the pro application arena.
Although it's such a little thing, I only *wish* the interface for Photoshop could borrow some of what iPhoto 6 is doing on the consumer end. The full-screen mode with the translucent slide-out palettes is *wonderful* to work with.
Reply
Denny Butts said 4:07PM on 1-20-2006
This seems very plausable for Adobe to hold out until the next revision. Does anyone remember when they made the Classic to OS X transition? Was it an upgrade?
The only flaw to your point jc is that what if a studio needs new machines. They are not going to want to buy a Dual Quad G5 (PowerPC) knowing that machine will be obsolete in 6 months.
Another point if this is true, what of the studios that did buy a Dual Quad G5 (PowerPC). What happens next year when Adobe releases their Intel upgrade. So CS3 won't run on a PowerPC? Now the studio needs to get new Intel Towers to run the latest Photoshop.
Reply
dashiel said 4:55PM on 1-20-2006
this isn't news, it's been understood since the announcement
a) photoshop is on an 18 month product life cycle which means CS3 will appear on or around october/november of *this* year
b) chizen said upon the intel transition announcement not to expect an universal binary until later 2006.
unrelated, but adobe's big intel focus right now is going to be flash/pdf.
Reply
Ted said 4:59PM on 1-20-2006
This week Adobe released After Effects 7. This is a commonly used pro application for video compositing on the Mac platform. In fact, Apple builds support for it into all of the pro video applications. I was surprised/concerned/disappointed that it was not released in universal binary. I am not sure what that means for the rest of their products, but I would say it is not a good sign for anything in the near future.
I do remember however that at WWDC when Steve announced the switch to intel, the ceo of Adobe came on stage and had a little speech stating that Adobe was committing to the x86 switch and would be ready. If I remember he actually said something to Steve like "What took you so long?"
Reply
Dot Flowers said 5:38PM on 1-20-2006
I would agree with JC, anyone concernd enough about Photoshops performace on Reosetta is already using a Dual G5. I'm betting that the new photoshop will be timed well with the Intel Powermacs (which hopefully have 4 Intel chips as an option, and not not have stupid name). So when Apple updates their pro desktop line, the new release of Photoshop should be right around the corner.
Reply
Robert C. said 5:48PM on 1-20-2006
As above commenters said, this is not conjecture; it's been public knowledge for some time. The CEO of Adobe has said their plans are to provide a universal binary with the next version of the Creative Suite, and most likely not sooner.
Here's the quote from Bruce Chizen, CEO of Adobe:
Q: So, when do you think that Adobe will be ready to take Photoshop?
Chizen: I haven't given a date yet, I'd be surprised if we did a MacTel only release. I think you'll find us doing what we did with OS X, which is to enhance the product and support the new environment at the same time. If you look at our product cycles for products like Photoshop and Creative Suite, they tend to be in the 18- to 24-month cycle, which means that you're talking about either Q4 of '06 or Q1 of '07.
http://news.com.com/Chizen+on+Apple+MacTel+switch+not+easy/2100-1046_3-5844899.html
Reply
Ryan said 7:42PM on 1-20-2006
I'm surprised nobody else had asked this, or brought it up, but I talked to Adobe at Macworld and asked about universal compatability. I got it from their own mouths that the next iteration of products will be the first to adopt the universal/Intel system. None of CS2's products will be available in universal format, period.
As for Virtual PC, same deal. Nobody but me asked these questions at Macworld? I got that same story posted the other day last week from a member of the Mac Business Unit (whose name I will withold here) last Thursday.
Nobody else asked?
Reply
Virtuous said 12:45PM on 1-21-2006
Adobe products are too expensive for everyone but graphics pros. I decided to switch to much less expensive comparable products.
Reply
Geekgonewild said 2:37AM on 1-22-2006
Just a question...a bit off topic but still very related to this post. Besides "Photoshop Pros", couldn't most users be well served by Gimp or CinePaint. Just looking for informed opinion. I'm not bashing Adobe or Photoshop here, I'm just begining think Photoshop is WAY too overhyped. All CS2 Apps on my Quad G5 load 2-3 times slower than GIMP. THX
Reply