backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 16 comment(s) - last by Zoomer.. on Mar 31 at 6:21 AM


Steve Jobs talking about universal binaries
Adobe says univeral Photoshop CS2 binary will take too much time to produce and makes no sense

Apple has been enjoying an extremely warm welcome for its new line of Intel-based Macintosh computers since the beginning of the year. Products are out the door and more are on the way. The most anticipated Intel-Mac of the bunch has been Apple's MacBook Pro, which replaces the potent PowerBook. For the last month or so, shipments of MacBook Pros have been lackluster at best but now, Apple has secured a large number of units and estimated ship times on Apple's online store indicate a quick 1 to 2 business days at most.

In its ongoing transition, Apple has ensured customers that all the applications that ship with its Intel-Macs run natively, and not a single component left unchecked. Apple has done an excellent job at keeping its word so far. In terms of 3rd party applications, many are beginning to switch over to universal binaries -- or simply versions that will execute on both Apple's new Intel-Macs and on its older PowerPC-based Macs.

For most purposes, Apple's x86 transition is going fairly well. However, professional applications such as those from Adobe, Macromedia and Microsoft still exist as PowerPC binaries only. For new Intel-Mac users, this is problematic. In all fairness, Apple has done a superb job creating an invisible layer of code-translation, called Rosetta, which allows PowerPC applications to run on the new Macs, but at a significant performance cost. According to benchmarks, most professional applications see a performance hit anywhere from 50% to 60%. Graphics pros who spend their time in Photoshop CS, will not find the new Macs at all pleasing to work with.

Of course, hopes are there that things are moving along, and that more professional applications will be recompiled fairly quickly. Unfortunately, according to Adobe engineer Scotty Byer, Photoshop CS2, Adobe's current flagship image editing application, may not become universal at all. The problems that Byer describes are rooted in the way Photoshop is designed as well as how big the application is. Byer says that although most applications can be recompiled by being sent through Apple's XCode development platform, Photoshop by its very nature requires much more intense work.

In Byer's company blog, he says:

Now, Apple is doing an amazing job at catching up rapidly, but the truth is we don't yet have a shipping XCode in hand that handles a large application well. And switching compilers always involves more work than you would think in a code base of this size.
...
Now, I'm an engineer, and I'm all for getting products out in front of customers so they can use their machines to their fullest as soon as possible, but there is just no way putting out a Universal Binary of Photoshop CS2 would make any sort of sense.


So far, Adobe has not released any official estimated release date for Photoshop CS2 to be ported. According to Byer's blog, a release date for universal Photoshop CS2 may never come at all. In fact, Byer says that it makes more sense for both Adobe to focus on making Photoshop CS3 as robust and polished as possible, and for Apple's customers to wait for Photoshop CS3.

Byer's comments regarding Adobe's engineering focus and Photoshop CS3's development comes during at time when Apple is shipping its new Intel-Macs in healthy numbers. However, one glance at Apple's online store paints a clear picture: Apple's professional line of desktops that graphics pros routinely use are not yet ready either.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Huh, they need to pay attention
By kpb on 3/27/2006 1:23:17 PM , Rating: 2
Adobe has officially stated that CS2 apps will never be univeral binary and did so quite a while ago.

http://www.adobe.com/products/pdfs /intelmacsupport...

First question on the second page says that.




RE: Huh, they need to pay attention
By kpb on 3/27/2006 1:25:09 PM , Rating: 2
www.adobe.com/products/pdfs/intelmacsupport.pdf

board inserted a random space breaking the url. Copy and paste should work


RE: Huh, they need to pay attention
By TomZ on 3/27/2006 2:51:32 PM , Rating: 2
This is a bug in the DailyTech web server. Can you guys fix that please?


RE: Huh, they need to pay attention
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 3/27/2006 3:04:27 PM , Rating: 2
It's not a bug, it's by design to prevent phishing, bots, etc. Copy the URLs into your browser and remove the space.

Kristopher


RE: Huh, they need to pay attention
By TomZ on 3/27/2006 5:10:24 PM , Rating: 2
If that's the case, then why does the server put an <a> tag around the URL in the first place?


RE: Huh, they need to pay attention
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 3/27/2006 7:21:16 PM , Rating: 2
Becuase the URL gets shorted (as does anything over 50 characters).


By PLaYaHaTeD on 3/30/2006 1:57:02 AM , Rating: 2
Kris, im sorry to be the one to break it to you but the functionality is really dumb and counterproductive.


RE: Huh, they need to pay attention
By Zoomer on 3/31/2006 6:21:44 AM , Rating: 2
I don't see how it would prevent pishing, anyway.


Apple Build Your Own
By hiscross on 3/27/2006 3:56:13 PM , Rating: 2
Apple should build their own Photoshop and tell Adobe to go merge with Corel. Photoshop has always been a great product, but can done one better by Apple. FCP has proved that.




RE: Apple Build Your Own
By AnaxagorasZeres on 3/27/2006 4:52:49 PM , Rating: 2
Not so sure about that... And I'm a huge Apple fan [Not a fanboy, just a fan.]


RE: Apple Build Your Own
By kelmon on 3/28/2006 6:12:08 AM , Rating: 2
Sounds a bit dangerous but I'm all for competition and I do believe that Apple has the capabilities and experience to produce a product to compete with Photoshop. I think the fear is that if such a product was made and did best Photoshop then Adobe might take its ball away and leave Apple to support the Mac platform on its own. The same problem applies to Microsoft and Office with the iWork suite. My recent experiments with iWork indicates that it is improving very nicely and that, for example, Pages is more usable (although not as powerful) than Word. However, I rather get the idea that the reason why we haven't seen a spreadsheet application yet in iWork is that Apple are afraid of annoying Microsoft such that they stop supporting Office:mac.

I hate the idea of the Mac platform being held to ransom but it definitely depends on cross-platform products being available since it cannot cope without them. I, for example, only switched to Apple in the first place because MS Office was available for it. No Office and no Photoshop would certainly cut down on the number of switchers regardless of how great the Apple-own software is.


Not News
By Shadowself on 3/27/2006 1:02:59 PM , Rating: 2
This is not news!

Adobe all but officially stated that none of the CS2 suite will show up as universal binaries. Adobe unofficially stated this the same day Apple announced the Intel based iMac and MacBook Pro. Adobe "spokesmen" at MacWorld were making these statements to anyone who asked.

These same Adobe representatives also unofficially stated that the entire CS3 suite will be universal and it will probably ship the first calendar quarter of 2007 (thought they did not give a firm ship date).

Some engineer deep in the bowels of Adobe stating what has already been stated over 10 weeks ago is not news, just his ramblings.




RE: Not News
By PLaYaHaTeD on 3/30/2006 1:55:07 AM , Rating: 2
Well, guess what Shadowself, I recently got a macbook pro and i was expecting Photoshop CS2 eventually in Universal binaries. So this is news to me.

Go start your own f*cking news site if you think everything here is 'old'.


Focus on CS3
By TomZ on 3/27/2006 12:49:45 PM , Rating: 3
Clearly, Adobe will focus on making CS3 run on the Intel Macs, in order to "encourage" folks to upgrade. The only reason CS2 doesn't make sense is that Adobe doesn't see a way to cover the engineering costs for making this change for CS2. But for CS3, this would be a different story, and the engineering costs of this change can be priced into the upgrade cost.




One way to make it work..
By GeeksAreSexy on 3/27/2006 12:51:54 PM , Rating: 3
Well, if the CS2 binary won't work on intel-based macs, just get XP running on it, and use the PC version.. :)

Kiltak
[Geeks Are Sexy] Tech. News
http://geeksaresexy.blogspot.com




By RyanHirst on 3/30/2006 7:55:31 PM , Rating: 2
When Apple gets their own Point of Sale software running on their Core Duo machines, then maybe they can go talk to Adobe about translating photoshop.




"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki