digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Would Linux help Adobe pummel Microsoft?

news.cnet.com — Columnist John Dvorak thinks that Adobe Systems has a Microsoft problem and that Linux provides a clear solution: Adobe could port its Creative Suite...to Linux as a shot across Redmond's bow. Then the company should race Linux in-house and develop a complete, optimized Linux OS...

show profanity settings
expand all
  • texklemer, on 08/20/2008, -4/+86If adobe ported Photoshop After effects and illustrator to Linux I would never have to touch anouther Microsoft product agian
    • norman619, on 08/21/2008, -16/+4Ah yes. Adobe is the only mainstream vendor people use. No way Adobe would port their apps to Linux. It does not make good business sense. The Linux market share does not make that a smart move. Adobe supports OSX and it hasn't helped them gain any more market share. To think that the mass appeal of Linux hinges on the support of a single vendor is idiotic at best.
      • salmonmoose, on 08/21/2008, -3/+28Actually it's not that dumb of an idea - many major studios prefer linux for reliability and cost issues. They'd leap at the chance to throw away all the other systems.
      • Meocross, on 08/21/2008, -13/+2what norman said may hold some truth if they put it on linux they wouldnt get much $$$ in return and wouldnt pay much attention to the linux version.

        its the same with unix, EVERY SOFTWARE I HAVE SEEN either avoids it or just plain out says they wont make a unix release.
      • norman619, on 08/21/2008, -16/+3salmonmoose:

        Actually it is a bad business idea. A bad financial move. Even Autodesk has pretty much told Linux users a Linux version of 3D Studio Max is not going to happen because it will mean recoding it from the ground up and that will cost them more money than the market share Linux represents is actually worth. Linux users have been begging them for a version of 3ds max for a LONG time now. The only reason they have a Linux version of Maya is that Alias already had one when Autodesk bought them.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 08/21/2008, -1/+8I'm happy that they've ported Flash Player over, but it would be cool if we could get some more companies.

        Normal619: It's not realistic to port an existing application like 3DSMax - That's like rewriting 3DSMax from the ground up because of all the core changes. That's ridicules for Windows even! I'm sure they're glad to maintain a Linux port for Maya because it's cross platform already - If it's well programmed it's probably not too much of a problem since the GUI isn't all that elegant on any platform (3DS Max seems to be more bloated these days though. Had to install .NET the last time, that's a strange requirement for a performance critical software.)

        Meocross: That's true, but Linux is seemingly the most promising for OEM deployment - It would be nice to see some desktops preloaded with CS3 and a comfortable environment, and perhaps it would help fuel interests in Linux. Of course It's not going to happen soon if at all, but since Linux has had quite unique results (possibly because of the whole 'distributions' thing, even though that causes a lot of problems with unification :) but maybe in the meantime some other interesting things will come out of OEMs selling Linux preloaded.
      • norman619, on 08/21/2008, -8/+2nmn:

        So are you trying to tell me porting Adobe's popular and industry standard applications to Linux does not require a rebuild from the ground up? If you are saying this I'd love to see your proof becasue as far as I know that is not the case. It's the same reason most computer games never make it to Linux.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3No, I'm saying that if it didn't require a rebuild from the ground up it would be more reasonable... I didn't mention whether it did or not, but I have said it before (and below I said it even.)
      • Atomic1fire, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5except you leave out silverlight as a factor
        the second adobe goes fully linux (or technically fully crossplatform as it would be windows/mac/Linux), it will drop Microsoft's market share, as well as create a few conversions and allow adobe to attack Microsoft's Window's market share, that's the main wheel behind its Silverlight progress. Microsoft created a plugin that goes against flash, so what is adobe to do, since Microsoft could also just as easily create a pdf competitor using a specific version of .doc or just .doc
        Killing adobe's control in the plugin market and decreasing its market share. Adobe will need to fight fire with fire in this round
      • srg13, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5"Even Autodesk has pretty much told Linux users a Linux version of 3D Studio Max is not going to happen because it will mean recoding it from the ground up and that will cost them more money than the market share Linux represents is actually worth"

        That's quite interesting, given that more than a few of Autodesk's products *only* work on Linux...

        And, given that Adobe recently ported CS3 to Mac OS, I'm willing to bet that it would be far easier to port than Max.
      • inksmithy, on 08/21/2008, -0/+6It's actually not that silly an idea. If Adobe came up with their own distro which was optimised for using the CS suite, and they sold the distro along with the suite, I'm fairly convinced it would sell like hotcakes. A stable, secure operating system designed to use the industry standard graphics applications? Of course it would.

        As far as complying with the GPL goes, all they would have to do is make the linux codebase they altered available. Not terribly onerous and if the code they altered doesn't include the CS (which it wouldn't) then they aren't really giving any secrets away. But they would be contibuting in a huge way towards OSS, which is good for the OSS crowd and they would in turn have lots o contributions available from the OSS crowd, which would be good for them.

        I think its a brilliant idea and think it would make a hell of a difference to linux takeup. How many times have you seen someone say 'if it ran photoshop, I would have it'?
      • javaroast, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3@norman619

        "So are you trying to tell me porting Adobe's popular and industry standard applications to Linux does not require a rebuild from the ground up? If you are saying this I'd love to see your proof becasue as far as I know that is not the case."

        Norm, I got more proof than your idle speculation. Photoshop used to be available for UNIX. Now I know that the code has changed a bit, but why would they suddenly starting coding the software in a way that wasn't able to be ported when it originally was. My guess is that Adobe could port to whatever platform they wanted without a complete rewrite.
        http://www.educational-software.com/adobe-photosho ...
      • mrBitch, on 08/21/2008, -0/+4@norman619 RE: " ... Adobe supports OSX and it hasn't helped them gain any more market share. "

        Ok, that PROVES you have no idea what you are talking about.

        Adobe sells MORE of their products for Mac OS X than for Windows.

        http://www.builderau.com.au/news/soa/Macromedia-lo ...

        " RE Sales percentage between CS3 on Windows, and CS3 on OS X... Sales of Adobe CS3 on the Mac make up about 75 percent of sales, consistent with CS2 sales percentages, he added. "
      • digifuzz, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2I got photoshop cs2 runnin yesterday through wine. works without a hitch so far, and I didn't have to jump through hoops to install it. Just put in the cd, and ran the setup.
    • awasson, on 08/21/2008, -1/+20That would be awsome... I'd port my workstations to Linux and they would scream. I'd run a copy of XP on VirtualBox just in case I needed something. Otherwise it would be a happy world of dependability and speed.
      • csplinter, on 08/21/2008, -2/+2What is this "my workstations" software you speak of?
      • PePas, on 08/25/2008, -0/+1You keep saying 'port' - I don't think it means what you think it means...
    • shadowspawn, on 08/21/2008, -30/+2Use a Mac. Seriously. That is really what Apple is about... and Adobe systems always worked on a Mac platform.

      This Linux crap is just that... crap. It will never, ever, ever happen. It works on Win32's and Win64's, but barely. WinX's are there for a reason, and Adobe knows this. Adobe needs to work. Otherwise, I will use an apple as will most people. And then you have a hardware platform and Adobe becomes a part of the platform... no more portable in pdf's except to read.

      I mean seriously.

      PDF.

      No need to port to nix.

      Unless AAPL drops the ball.
      • norman619, on 08/21/2008, -0/+15Zip up. Your iFanboy is showing. I use Adobe's CS3 suite and they all work fine on my Vista machine. too bad they haven't come out with 64 bit versions of their apps. The 64 bit versions of my other art programs run faster than the 32 bit versions I was using. No reason to use OSX since all of Adobe's applications run just fine under Windows. Apple was not happy when Adobe started supporting Windows many many years ago. They knew that move meant they were going to lose more users to Windows which actually did happen.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 08/21/2008, -0/+12What the *****?

        I stopped reading after "Use a Mac".

        Seriously, If you want your comment to be taken seriously make it worth more than a joke - You have no solid reasons behind why they should not have an application that is cross platform to Linux. The hardest part about making an application portable to Linux is having an application that is truly multi platform - obviously if CS3 were truly cross platform and not just #ifdef'd over they would have to port the underlying components and do a crapload of debugging, but in that case it wouldn't be entirely unreasonable as it is now. If they ever have to rewrite entirely a component of CS3, that's when the real chance would come.
      • transform100, on 08/21/2008, -1/+10Yes there is a need to port to Linux, last time I checked Apple doesn't offer OSX for normal x86 machines so no Mac for me.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 08/21/2008, -3/+2Well there's always Hackintosh if you were desperate but that obviously won't fly in a production environment, not to mention it's annoying and some hardware has problems...

        Then again, for normal x86 machines there is Windows, so that idea doesn't work out very well. The only way the Creative Suite is coming to Linux is if there is some serious core rewrites and they want to experiment with the possibility - but even that is unlikely.
      • SniperZero, on 08/21/2008, -2/+2Rofl clearly your a dumb ass.
        Even though I linux only. Photoshop runs perfectly fine under xp/vista 32/64 without any problems.
        Macintosh has no chance while it is limited to its on specific hardware.
      • DestroyFascism, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2Yeah shell out $4k for a mac and $4k for adobe...

        Right! In Ya Dreams!
    • sg1fan, on 08/21/2008, -2/+5Sweet, I already have a dual boot into Ubuntu... and I need Adobe for my web work... Looking forward to this.
      • mcfara, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2Same exact situation here...looking forward to the day where I don't need Windows at all
    • tHePeOPle, on 08/21/2008, -0/+14Be nice if they could at least get the ***** flash plugin to work right.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1Firefox 3.0.1
        + Latest Flash 10 RC
        = Most Win Linux has had with Adobe software
    • THESUPERDEVIL, on 08/21/2008, -1/+3Maybe Abode will make it's own version of linux?
    • jack12345678910, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3if adobe made its own version of linux, it would probably look better than mac.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1Yeah, If they can make graphics software that looks better than mac they can do anything >_>
  • blatant3, on 08/20/2008, -14/+4Yeah. What he said.
  • 4DFX, on 08/20/2008, -7/+25Err... what? Adobe helping Linux? Give me a break...
    • yertthedigger, on 08/20/2008, -7/+20This article is just a what-if day dream.

      If you want supreme development tools for Linux, start writing them; Gimp, Dia, and Blender have already hit that area, all without needing Adobe. And if more people focus on Moonlight, you might actually have an open specification to write to, including dev tools... unless you want to stay with Flash and hope Adobe keeps the Linux version up to date.
      • whereiseljefe, on 08/21/2008, -1/+9You mean like it's been doing and actually producing Mac + Windows + Linux AIR runtimes since day one?

        It doesn't matter how hard one focuses on Moonlight, it will always lag behind Silverlight since they have to re-implement everything, especially since Microsoft has only given them meager help (a few unit tests and some internal documentation).

        To say that because Adobe produces binaries and those might not be updated as fast as you require is worse than relying on a community reverse-engineered clone of a solution produced by a company who has not contributed anything worthwhile to porting said product to ANY other platform (moonlight on a mac? even MORE work) is completely ridiculous.

        By the way, checkup on Adobe Flex and notice how the compiler and command line tools are available in Linux.
    • BradHAWK, on 08/21/2008, -2/+2I didn't RTFA but from TFS I understood that it was about Adobe helping Adobe.
    • pak314, on 08/21/2008, -0/+7Well Adobe is a part of the Linux foundation. That doesn't mean a whole lot given the technical effort to port those apps and their target market but I don't think they are Linux unfriendly.
      • whereiseljefe, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3They've been fairly linux friendly for a while and you can see them testing the waters with linux ports of Acrobat Reader.
    • SniperZero, on 08/21/2008, -2/+2Although since adobe took over macromedia the flash player has actually become decent.. so maybe... just maybe there might be some light in the future.
      • DarkShroud, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2Yeah maybe they could do us a real favor and release an up to date SDK.for flash.
    • rpgmaker, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5Well, if Adobe does port its CS suite to Linux it will certainly help. I'm sure many graphic companies would not miss having to pay Windows licenses.
  • YodaJones, on 08/20/2008, -5/+35I would not hesitate to upgrade my Production Studio Premium to a Linux version.

    These Adobe products are the only software preventing us from being all Linux all the time. I think we are not the only ones.
    • wigren, on 08/20/2008, -3/+3Add QuickBooks to the list.
    • ambiescent, on 08/21/2008, -5/+3And Outlook 2007 for me. I have to run a VM just for that. (Evolution's support for Exchange is very flaky)
      • Atomic1fire, on 08/21/2008, -0/+6Not going to happen, and if it did
        Microsoft would make that outlook crippled
    • Meocross, on 08/21/2008, -6/+0Add Keygens, Cracks, Utorrent, and U-Mediaplayer to the list.
      • jamesdew, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5Utorrent runs perfectly fine under wine
      • Meocross, on 08/22/2008, -0/+0Tried to "run wine" it froze a 2Ghz ubuntu desktop several times, i dont trust that beverage.
    • srg13, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3"I would not hesitate to upgrade my Production Studio Premium to a Linux version."

      Same here... I'd even buy the suite again if that wasn't an option.
  • qbthemc, on 08/21/2008, -28/+8I lol'd when i read Linux.
    • Klowner, on 08/21/2008, -4/+18So your reading tutor has been beneficial to you then?
    • awasson, on 08/21/2008, -1/+6Awww.
      Good for you :-b
  • RMoore08, on 08/21/2008, -7/+5I dunno, but I wish someone would.
  • Medicamusic, on 10/28/2008, -8/+24Would a bear help a palm tree pummel a remote?
    • akshay626, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5WTF? Best analogy ever...
    • Tenoq, on 08/21/2008, -2/+2No, but they do ***** in the woods.
    • pak314, on 08/21/2008, -1/+1Yes. It would put the remote up on the palm tree and run into it.
    • 1timeuser, on 08/21/2008, -1/+1Yes, and the pope wears a funny hat.
  • JamesBrown, on 08/21/2008, -3/+23how about linking to the original article instead of to your lame-ass blog, submitter?
  • Klowner, on 08/21/2008, -3/+22This is probably the most coherent idea I've ever heard come out of John C. Dvorak
    • norman619, on 08/21/2008, -5/+10So in other words all of his stuff is pretty much a waste of time? Thanks for the heads up.
      • SteveMax, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5Dvorak is a professional troll. All of his "ideas" are carefully engineered to create heated discussion, hopefully on his site's comments (giving him more money from the ads) or in blogs linking to his page (increasing the pagerank, driving more people to his site and giving more money from ads). In some articles he starts with somewhat coherent points, but misuses them just enough to hit a spot on both sides of the argument. In other cases his argumentation is completely flawed, making lots of people point those flaws. In every one of them, he makes a lot of money.

        Should you read his articles? Yes, they usually at least bring up some good discussion. Should you trust his opinions? As much as you'd trust a $2586,84 bill.
    • jejones, on 08/21/2008, -1/+7You misspelled "only".
    • Kelmon, on 08/21/2008, -1/+6It's one of the stupidest ideas I've heard because it makes no financial sense for Adobe to invest in porting the Creative Suite to Linux. They already get paid from the Windows and Mac versions and a Linux version will simply eat into their R&D, Support and Marketing costs. The only reason to produce a version is if you need to prevent the adoption of competing software. In the meantime existing license holder will continue to buy the Windows or Mac versions because they can't switch to Linux without a Linux version of the Creative Suite.
      • gandhii, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1gimp and inkscape are always improving.. if a 3d or video production house only needs a photoshop and illustrator for certain specific uses, and they're already running their main software on linux, then it is already getting to the point that it may be worth a small learning curve to change to gimp/inkscape instead of purchasing cs and having a separate machine running osx or windows just for those two apps. But if you could use cs without using a separate computer, and needing to learn new apps.. then Adobe has a strong advantage to retain its market share.
      • PePas, on 08/25/2008, -0/+1I would even guess that Adobe gets paid by Microsoft to NOT port to Linux, so they'd lose that. Also, there is a big difference between competing and all-out war (although Google is far from being dead..!).
  • dpb1994, on 08/21/2008, -16/+5*scratches head*

    That would be cool, but if you don't like Windows and need CS, why not just switch to a Mac?
    • infiniphunk, on 08/21/2008, -1/+24Because Macs cost too much for what they do, and some of us would prefer to go without the fashion statement.
      • dpb1994, on 08/21/2008, -6/+1If you can't get a job using your CS skills, maybe Gimp would suffice.
      • zcreem, on 08/21/2008, -1/+3What have skills and jobs to do with other, or do you think all the people with jobs are better than those without, if so you'll grow and learn.
        And what does having a job to do with Macs being expensive, so you have the money and waste it on fashion.
      • dpb1994, on 08/21/2008, -4/+1ugghh... another idealist.
    • MaxterICC, on 08/21/2008, -0/+8because i feel stupid pirating a $3000 piece of software and then paying about that much for a machine to run it.... that and because steve jobs wears far too many v-necks for me to trust him.
      • dpb1994, on 08/21/2008, -3/+1So run a hacked copy of OSX on PC hardware
      • madpuppy, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2I think he wears "mock" turtle necks
    • norman619, on 08/21/2008, -4/+4Same reason most people don't use Linux or Mac. Did you really have to ask that question? I'm betting if you think really hard you can figure it out for yourself. I know you can do it!
      • dpb1994, on 08/21/2008, -3/+2You are an idiot, but I'm sure you must have already figured that out by now.
      • stuffradio, on 08/21/2008, -2/+2Lots of people use Linux... +1 to calling him an idiot.
      • mrBitch, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1@norman: sometimes you post some well thought out responses and ideas, however this is not one of those times.

        you just called yourself out as an idiot.
      • gandhii, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1I seem to be reading Norm's comment differently. He seems to be implying that people use what they're using and would prefer not running different OS's for different apps. Which would seem to be the point of making a version of CS for Linux.
    • orcishstra, on 08/21/2008, -1/+3Because I don't want to waste my money on a Mac!
      I like Linux and I want to use Compiz Fusion with wobbly windows and desktop cube etc.. which you can't get on OS X!
      • norman619, on 08/21/2008, -4/+2Games, being 2nd when Apple was the only choice, and a larger mainstream software library gives Windows the advantage and the win. Major mainstream software vendors will not support Linux until it is more widely used and more people will not start using Linux until mainstream softwar vendors start supporting it. Linux is stuck in a catch22 situation.
    • sg1fan, on 08/21/2008, -1/+2Can I get that red diamond app for a mac too?
  • roxgod666, on 08/21/2008, -12/+2nothing can pummel microsoft NOTHING!!!
    • PRlME, on 08/21/2008, -0/+6you're getting dugg down, but it's true. Look at Windows Me, or Vista its total *****, but MS recovers. Linux is very powerful but MS is still #1. They even jumped into the Video game Industry and have been kicking ass.
      • stuffradio, on 08/21/2008, -2/+3Vista is good, what are you talking about?
    • roxgod666, on 08/21/2008, -0/+0yeah because they were #1. Even though a lot of their products suck, they were still the first ones to give their OS to the major PC manufacturers and the first ones to create something as useful as office. If apple had done it sooner, this world would be run by apple instead. People keep buying their products because Microsoft jammed it down peoples throats and now their cashing in. pretty smart of them, they dont have to give a ***** about anyone or any of their products, but they will still make millions from it while apple tries so hard on theirs and they will never be as successful as microsoft because microsoft was first
      • DarkShroud, on 08/21/2008, -1/+1MS Office is amazing because MS spent millions doing mass surveys to find out what people needed/wanted in office tools and then followed through with the data. When I ran Windows 3.11 I used Word Perfect. By the time I upgraded to 98SE I ditched it in favor of MS Office 97. Just because MS office was a lot better.

        To give some perspective the Apple II(2) had basic spread sheet software.
  • 2Deluxe, on 08/21/2008, -7/+32Dude even Acrobat reader takes 15 minutes to load, ***** an Adobe operating system.
    • maninalift, on 08/21/2008, -1/+5Adobe reader is really not needed on Linux but if Photoshop and the flash development tools were ported to Linux, that would open up a huge market (for Linux) and allow Adobe to... now I'm just repeating the article.
    • Theli, on 08/21/2008, -0/+6Isn't that a pretty good argument for optimization?
    • gandhii, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2I've noticed no difference in how long acrobat takes to load when comparing XP and Ubuntu Studio on the same computer.
  • Rakuseki, on 08/21/2008, -10/+17Would sales on linux distros help Adobe? Of course. Would Adobe ever want to 'pummel' Microsoft? No, why would they? They're a OS Manufacturer with a huge market share. That's like Adobe saying no to money. This just seems dumb to me. More importantly, what does Adobe have in the deal to help any manufacturer beat another one, especially when the 'great enemy' controls a *huge* portion of its customer base? If anything Linux should prove itself to Adobe that it's worth porting to and then if Adobe decides it's a good (read: profitable) idea, then it'll happen. I don't think Microsoft has any say in that. Adobe could care less about OS wars.
    • Swil, on 08/21/2008, -3/+4Excellent point, I don't know why people are digging that comment down.
    • norman619, on 08/21/2008, -3/+6How dare you point out the obvious! Adobe likes making money? No way!
    • awasson, on 08/21/2008, -1/+7Adobe would love to pummel Microsoft for several reasons. First because Adobe & Microsoft have been waging a silent battle for almost 10 years over the PDF specification. MS has their own portable document format but Adobe beat them to it and won however it's not over. MS would like to take that title. The second reason is that Adobe Flash is directly under attack by MS Silverlight. Adobe would do well to get people off a Silverlight supported platform and onto a Flash supported platform.
      • Kelmon, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3Somewhat true. However, this really isn't very important and certainly not important for Adobe to effectively shoot themselves in the foot. Microsoft has no competitor to Adobe's "cash cow" Creative Suite so there is little to nothing to be gained by porting the software to another platform. Adobe needs Microsoft in a similar way that Microsoft needs Adobe. It's practically a symbiotic relationship and it's the same as with Apple and Adobe, and Apple and Microsoft. They might not like each other but you can't always choose people you like to deal with in business.
    • srg13, on 08/21/2008, -1/+4"Would Adobe ever want to 'pummel' Microsoft? No, why would they?"

      As awasson said, there is the Silverlight vs. Flash thing. Then the whole Expression suite junk, the PDF thing, etc.
    • philhatesyou, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1You're assuming that, by porting their Creative Suite to Linux, they automatically won't make a Windows version. This is absolutely retarded. They could do both, and it would STILL provide quite a hit to MS. MS doesn't want their customers to have choices, because they know what'll happen when they do.
  • hamdoken, on 08/21/2008, -8/+34This is John "Why would anyone want to use a computer mouse?" Dvorak. The same guy who said that the Mac Mini would bankrupt Apple, and predicted that Apple was going to abandon OSX and switch to XP in their computers.

    In other words, he is known for outrageously implausible predictions, and regularly pulls ***** out of his ass.
    • rebotfc, on 08/21/2008, -0/+13Er... that's his job.
    • philhatesyou, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3You've assaulted the man's character, now go ahead and try and get at the substance of his argument. I agree the guy is usually full of *****, but this idea is solid.
  • Dylson, on 08/21/2008, -6/+5No. This has been on the front page before.
  • themikeman, on 08/21/2008, -4/+9Such a scenario would basically eliminate my hesitation in making the full switch to Linux. Do the right thing Adobe...
    • zcreem, on 08/21/2008, -1/+3Vendor support for hardware drivers is a bigger issue for me, PS CS2 runs fine under Wine anyway.
    • sg1fan, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2dual boot... helps the transition :)
    • mahenda, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1Yeah you can use Wine with CS2, or native Pixel from www.pixelimageeditor.com, or give it a try with GIMPshop.
  • greensky, on 08/21/2008, -0/+29Instead of making their own version of Linux, they should just work with the major Linux vendors to make sure their software worked well on them.

    • JQP123, on 08/21/2008, -3/+1Or better yet, how about if the Linux vendors worked together to make their operating systems a little more compatible. Then more commercial vendors like Adobe might consider porting to Linux.
    • gandhii, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2The point of an Adobe CS Distro is strictly for production house use. A full on environment built not only to contain CS, but be it, would be pretty freaking sweet for such a use. Imagine how much more such a system could be tied into the OS and interface. CS is already moving in that direction in the way that all the apps are being built to work with each other in a less autonomous way.
  • daviangel, on 08/21/2008, -0/+7I wouldn't hold my breath since next version is gonna be 64bits for Windows only since it's too much work for them to get the 64bit mac version out at the same time! Probably don't have enough programmers as it is and they are probably already overworked!
    • zcreem, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1Employ more we're cheap enough at the moment, there is a recession on.
      • maninalift, on 08/21/2008, -1/+1And people aren't so quick to upgrade their software either genius.
  • ricoboy24, on 08/21/2008, -12/+2Adobe+linux wont make me leave Crysis.
  • JamesBrown, on 08/21/2008, -1/+7I can't believe Dvorak's article only mentioned Silverlight and completely neglected to mention Microsoft Expression Studio, an entire suite of Adobe rip-off products. Silverlight (and Blend) is only a piece of the pie.

    in my opinion Silverlight is vastly superior to Flash. But we'll see if after the olympics anyone actually uses it.
    • ilgaz, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2A thing which does only runs on Windows XP and OS X Intel is vastly superior than Adobe Flash which is common even on smart phones these days and probably your settop box runs.
      Not to forget there is no silverlight creation tool on designers choice of OS, OS X.
      Yea, right.

  • das7282, on 08/21/2008, -6/+17Why would I want Microsoft "pummeled"?.. Believe it or not, there are actually people out there that "like" Windows. Like me, I've used and have experience with both Linux and OSX but I still prefer Windows and always come back to it.
    • JamesBrown, on 08/21/2008, -3/+13I agree. There's nothing wrong with Windows. If you prefer OSX or Linux that's fine, but Windows is a good operating system
      • zcreem, on 08/21/2008, -9/+3"There's nothing wrong with Windows"
        Come on no one has written the perfect OS, and sorry Windows is far from perfect, or why do they keep fixing it, upgrading it.
      • TokenBlack, on 08/21/2008, -0/+7@zcreem

        That's a pretty stupid argument against Microsoft, because Apple comes out with fixes all the time. You said yourself, no one makes the perfect OS. That includes Apple and the various Linux distros.
      • maninalift, on 08/21/2008, -3/+4@TokenBlack I don't think it was supposed to be an argument _against_ Microsoft, just pointing out that it is silly to say "there is nothing wrong" with any operating system
      • myranttoyou, on 08/21/2008, -1/+1
    • Swil, on 08/21/2008, -2/+6Yeah... there seems to be some kind of division along these lines going on:

      Mac & Linux users - love their operating system and will fight to the death for it
      Windows users - perfectly happy with their operating system and will get on with whatever their actual job is, leaving the fighting for the firebreathing Mac & Linux users
    • aldolinares, on 08/21/2008, -3/+3If you want to be "cool" just talk ***** about MS... you know... is the new thing... They are "cool" hating Microsoft.
    • boazg, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3nothing wrong with windows (i personally can't stand using it, but that's a matter of taste). it's microsoft and it's business tactics that we despise, often fear, and would like to see out of the market.
  • thomas, on 08/21/2008, -4/+10The fact that MSNBC is using Sliverlight isn't exactly shocking. The MS is MSNBC does stand for Microsoft.
    • ilgaz, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2Also what they do is completely un-professional considering 99% of visitors have a working Adobe Flash player installed. Hell, likely 90% of people also have some sort of Windows Media Player plugin working (Flip4Mac, xine etc.)

      Actions like these completely wasted their prestige and popularity, they are still doing same childish things. Remember the "ActiveX" control that let you hover the news while everyone did it written in Java applet?

  • iumentum, on 08/21/2008, -1/+4Corel already tried this exact strategy as one of their last resorts to beat out Microsoft. They came out with Corel Linux and made their office and graphics suite available on Linux.
    Long story short, it didn't work.
    • awasson, on 08/21/2008, -1/+8Corel doesn't really compare to Adobe in relative wealth & ingenuity. Adobe is a far mightier corp.
      • iumentum, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5They don't now. There was a point when Corel was a serious player though. Before MS Office dominated it was Word Perfect on every university computer. Ingenuity-wise, They had a extensive range of products in both office and graphics. I'm not sure of their stock history, but I'd wager they were worth at least as much as Adobe at some point.
    • zcreem, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5Corel had lost it long before they tried the Linux stunt, it was more an act of desperation than corporate strategy to attack MS
      • iumentum, on 08/21/2008, -2/+1Yeah, they were losing the battle. That's why I pointed out it was a "last resort" kind of strategy. Although it was somewhat desperate, it was an actual strategy to compete with MS. Many believe that it was their effort to directly compete with Microsoft that ultimately took Corel down. Some of these days, when Corel sought to compete in the office spectrum were before the anti-trust thing and MS played pretty dirty.
        Ultimately, the strategy to use Linux as a alternative platform for their suite came didn't bring in enough revenue fast enough. They sold their distribution, which then became Xandros. They expressed some desire to continue to support and develop products on Linux but there didn't seem to be much demand.
        Microsoft bought out like $135 million worth of Corel's stocks around this point. An Interesting aside, MS asked Corel to develop .NET on the FreeBSD platform. I don't think this effort went anywhere though.
    • DestroyFascism, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2They Killed Jacs Paint Shop Pro

      I used to prefer that over Adobe as it was a better UI and the tools were almost as good as Photoshop bar a few. Aside from that is faster, had better text editing, (Once) and the layers tool was a snap.
      For a beginner it used to be the best out there, then Coral ruined it so I spent the extra 300 bucks.

    • gandhii, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1Corel sucked.
  • orcishstra, on 08/21/2008, -0/+7I already have a copy of Adobe CS3. I would love future editions to work with Ubuntu without having to use Wine.
    Adobe don't need to make a Linux distro and the creative suite doesn't need to be free or Open Source.
    I'd still buy it!
  • DeuceDiggalow, on 08/21/2008, -1/+4I don't see why they wouldn't want to port it to Linux regardless
    • JamesBrown, on 08/21/2008, -2/+3because few people use linux? fewer than those who use mac or windows? maybe that has something to do with it.

      not trying to disparage linux, just stating a fact
    • mahenda, on 08/21/2008, -4/+1Well Linux marketshare is not really interesting compared to PC market.
  • Enderplayer1, on 08/21/2008, -5/+2Why do Linux articles ask me so many questions?
  • Sneakernets, on 08/21/2008, -6/+5Linux has to have a stable baseline first!
    • DestroyFascism, on 08/21/2008, -1/+1Yeah because where all gypsies...
  • BBrains, on 08/21/2008, -3/+3Linux? Vista is the biggest contributor to the pummeling of Microsoft.

    (ok, cheap shot, I admit it)
  • Julz, on 08/21/2008, -8/+2why would people who bitch about paying for an OS run an expensive app like photoshop?
    • taseedorf, on 08/21/2008, -5/+3because they pirate it or get it for free from work, school, etc
      • Kanten, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2Because that definitely nets Adobe profits.
  • ambivalentmonk, on 08/21/2008, -8/+1How many of you are using Windows? If you're all using Linux, then great, continue on. If not, then how is Microsoft being pummeled such a great thing?
    While we all have gripes about Microsoft products, seriously, what would we do without them?
  • tflowholdings, on 08/21/2008, -2/+6Linux > OSX
    • Kelmon, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2That may be true but you have a Catch-22 situation when it comes to getting Adobe to port Creative Suite to Linux. The lack of Creative Suite for Linux prevent adoption of Linux by the creative industry while the lack of sufficient demand for a Linux version of Creative Suite prevents Adobe from porting it. The Mac version already exists and a lot of the creative industry already uses Macs. Linux being "better" than OS X is really rather immaterial. Linux needs users and, for preference, a strong competitor to the Creative Suite before you'll see any change to the status quo.
      • tflowholdings, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2We don't want no turtleneck wearing creative industry, anyway :)
    • ethana2, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1Change all your browser useragents to Ubuntu whatever OS you're on. If everyone does it, web statistics will begin to reflect demand more accurately.

      about:config -> useragent in firefox.
      Vendor is the OS, and I don't know what the other ones are because I lost them a long time ago spoofing Googlebot/2.1

      ..but yeah, if you want to support your choices, that's the best way I can think of to do it.
  • ronaldmonster, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5I doubt porting a product to another platform would take down an entire company.
    • philhatesyou, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2It certainly wouldn't, but it would most definitely put a dent in them.
  • slorocks, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1It just a good business model that works. All the Linux peeps need to put up $$ and come together not to take down MS but to make there platform more widspresd and easier to use than MS for moms and Pops and all the users out there that just want to use a mouse for most of there stuffand then offer golbal support for one Linux distro. Then as one platform you would have a chance of somday being as big
  • BlueTide, on 08/21/2008, -0/+5I'm kind of frustrated with this situation /I/ have with Linux. In theory, I could use the operating system and tweak it to work enough for me, but what is holding me back is the app side. Having Adobe to port their stuff there would take away the major pain from the things I want to do. Mind you, this includes a few apps that do not have reasonable counterparts for my use. Photoshop is one, but Linux is also missing a reasonable Flash equivalent, Illustrator and decent video editors to name a few. I could even live with some unpolished features in other software such as OpenOffice, but the ones above are sort of the deal breakers for me.

    But looking things from Adobe's perspective, things ain't that easy. It's not just the software itself, but such a move expects a lot from the OS underneath. Color profiles for displays, stable underpinnings that you don't need to re-compile the software all the time, some way of testing it on various distros, video codecs that are suitable and so forth. I'm sure I'm even missing some extremely crucial ones.

    And what do they get in return? Market share is about 1% of which unknown percentage X would actually buy this stuff. Well, that could get bit higher. New platform(s) to support? Just lovely, I bet. Escape from Microsoft and Apple? Why, exactly? Produce own computer? I bet that the speed difference wouldn't be so remarkable it would justify the cost for them. We've seen plenty of this in the high-end that has been coming down, SGI's anyone?

    More realistically, they need to see how they feed their families and base their decisions on that. I would welcome our Adobe overlords and may be daft, but I just don't see large enough strategic incentive nor monetary one right now when most of their audience would need to switch platforms. That's lot to ask from people. Prove me wrong, Adobe. :)
    • serth, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2Wow, couldn't have said it better myself.

      Personally, I love Linux, and I'm a huge supporter of open source software (I use open source software wherever I can, such as Open Office), but certain things prevent me from actually running Linux on my computer, mainly the Adobe products, and (as parent post states) I don't see Adobe actually going through with this. Definitely a suggestion that should be granted some consideration, but logically and financially, I don't see it happening.
    • Toshibi, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3I have never used the Adobe Products seeing them as mostly tools for Graphic Artists (actual professionals) and am quite happy with The Gimp for everything I do (and mind you, I do draw and use the Gimp to do digital inking of comic style art.) OpenOffice works perfectly fine for everything I do as far as spread sheets and word processing. Also, if I want to code I just open up a text editor and go to work, I can do HTML, PHP, whatever right from Gedit or if I want to WYSIWYG it, I have tools available through the package manager.

      I've been using Linux now since 2005 as my only OS and haven't had a single problem or have felt that I've missed anything (except for headaches, viruses, and spyware).

      Anyhow, considering so many people demand Adobe products, I'm wondering if Shuttleworth should put some weight in with Adobe....he seems to be the OSS golden boy these days and Ubuntu + Adobe would be an interesting partnership. Considering the Netbook market and Linux growth there, it could lead to more growth in general.
  • TheMachine1, on 08/21/2008, -3/+1If I have to choose being free with Adobe and stuck in the Vista Matrix I choose the Vista Matrix. Its pretty bad but eating that Adobe slop is not my cup of tea.
  • taseedorf, on 08/21/2008, -4/+3I do NOT want MS to be crippled. They do so much for innovative technologies most people have no clue...and vista does NOT suck. Wow, get a sys that can run it and quit complaining, it never crashes for me and I even run a 64 bit version
    • twelvedogs, on 08/21/2008, -0/+4MS don't pull their finger out till they're threatened, look at how they didn't touch ie for 6 years until firefox came along, and suddenly we get 2 new versions in 2 years. if i was a microsoft fan i'd be praying for adobe to do something like this, so microsoft would start trying a bit harder.
    • Cherubim, on 08/21/2008, -0/+0Microsoft and innovation do not belong in the same sentence. They are not innovative in a single area apart from screwing the end-user. They buy, steal and cheat their way to market share. If you can't see that then you're a terminal moron.

      As for your comments about Vista, you sound like a ten year old pretentious little *****. Vista is a horribly flawed and dangerously insecure operating system that performs as well as a fat elephant dancing. Microsoft should be utterly ashamed of themselves for producing such an appalling operating system.


  • adarkmethod, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2designing their products into a custom Linux distro would make their products undeniably faster and more reliable, but unfortunately, until some smaller vendors jump over and boost the market share a bit, it probably won't happen. Those of us who are committed to the cause will keep chipping away, but until we get some key vendors on board, most of you people will probably just keeping forking your money over to companies like M$ and Apple so they can ***** you in return.
  • zeruch, on 08/21/2008, -0/+4Dvorak is simply regurgitating an idea (he never really does have any intelligent ones of his own) that while having merit, Adobe has never seen itself brave enough to really take the initiative.

    Instead, MS will pressure it from one end, and open source alternatives, while not taking its bread and butter business away in the immediate future, will erode at it edges, slowly taking away those exorbitant profit margins.

    They are frankly, ossified strategically. And I say this having bought CS3 Standard today, after years of sticking with just PS7 and Illustrator 10 (I also use Gimp, Fyre, Inkscape, Krita and a few other apps as I see fit)
  • Ryanw430, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2I have always wondered why Google and IBM can't team up to take down MS. They could probably even get Sony to jump on board with them. I mean, Linux has become fairly advanced and user friendly during the past five years; it's not really a huge leap of marginal production given any combination of these three companies' combined equities in the marketplace. AMD/ATI would fall in with IBM--imagine them working with Sony to create the PS4/PSP2 with Linux and Google as standards on both systems!
    • Kanten, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2Because Sony is a consumer electronics developer. They don't give a damn about OS competition. The console market is the only place Sony even directly competes with Microsoft.
      • philhatesyou, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1Seeing as to how MS is encroaching on their game console market with money coming directly from the profits of MS' OS/Office division, I'd say it would benefit Sony quite a bit to help bring some pain to the Windows monopoly.
  • upfrontfanatic, on 08/21/2008, -3/+0If Adobe were to release a Linux port of their Creative Suite, I am willing to bet my entire savings account it would take less than 5 minutes from release to you had Linux users bitching about 1. It not being free (as in beer) and 2. it not being free (as in speech).

    This is not trying to rag down on Linux users as feeling overly entitled, but there is simply no point denying that Linux users are even more into the mindset that all software should be no-cost, all bells provided, than your regular Windows warez-kiddie.

    How many commercial vendors apart from Oracle makes software from Linux which they actually profit from?

    And for the record: I am a Windows user with no pirated software on any of my machines.
  • Kanten, on 08/21/2008, -1/+3No no no no. No amount of "Is Linux winning?" articles you guys submit is going to change anything.

    Also how would Adobe "pummel" Microsoft? They're not even in a competing market.
  • Kelmon, on 08/21/2008, -0/+2Sounds like a very expensive knee-jerk reaction to Silverlight, if you ask me. It took Adobe years simply to get the Creative Suite to run on Intel Macs, and Macs have historically been important to Adobe. Getting the Creative Suite to run on a new OS that Adobe distributes sounds incredibly expensive and I honestly don't see where Adobe is going to see a suitable return on their investment.

    Silverlight is indeed competition to Adobe but I don't see it as sufficiently important that it would prompt a Linux port of their core software. Rather, a proper competitor to Creative Suite on Linux that threatens to eat into Adobe's market share would be the catalyst for any move to Linux. In the meantime Adobe can continue to receive license payments for the software on the platforms that they already support. Until such competition appears Linux is stuck in a Catch-22 situation: users won't migrate to Linux until Creative Suite is available for it and Adobe won't port Creative Suite to Linux until there is sufficient demand for it.
  • over9k, on 08/21/2008, -0/+0Linux is open source. Instead of waiting for Adobe to port its products, why don't you just write a decent alternative to it.
    • ethana2, on 08/21/2008, -0/+0GIMP 2.6 will be a heck of a lot closer, but it's still in development.
      When they started running into walls, they re-architected the entire GIMP core to remove its deficiencies.
      • ilgaz, on 08/22/2008, -0/+1Even Donald Knuth says there is nothing to replace Photoshop yet. Sad but true.

        The community based development for GIMP makes it lack "Professional features". Also professionals using Gimp and not supporting the project adds more to the issue.

        People don't understand the difference of "open source", "free as in.." thing. If I was a photo/design professional who made money with Gimp involved, I would directly donate a good amount to the project without being forced to.
  • srg13, on 08/21/2008, -0/+4I already sent in a feature request - tell them how you feel: http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name ...
  • twelvedogs, on 08/21/2008, -0/+0It's so unlikely that adobe does anything with linux that it's almost ridiculous. Adobe couldn't give a ***** about linux, their apps are cobbled together and the ones they port to linux barely work without crashing. Maybe in 10 years.
  • polyp2000, on 08/21/2008, -0/+3Not sure if anyone remembers this , but prior to Adobe purchasing Macromedia (some competing products were subsequently ditched) Macromedia promised an initiative to port its suite of applications to Linux (Makes you wonder if they had other motives doesnt it ? ). We dont hear much about that any more anyhow.
    Im not convinced Adobe are that interested in Linux at all. Sadly I feel this is just a pipe dream.
  • macwac, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1He makes controversial statements.. (it's his job) I'm sure if people looked at everyones track record you would find flaws - even with you. Nearly every Tech mag assumed that Apple would go down the toilet... he's made more accurate predictions than most (such as with the MP3). Seems like you hold a serious grudge against the guy. He has a huge following for a reason, just because you disagree with him doesn't mean that he pulls ***** out of his ass. At least he makes the industry think alternatively (with a proposed solution), which is hell of a lot better than most tech articles i read, where people only whine without coming with a solution - whether Adobe would want to adapt his idea is something else, but I for once would like it.
  • BurgerPunch, on 08/21/2008, -3/+2Why bother? Macs have a larger installer base in the creative industry/deskop GUESS WHAT ITS ALREADY RUNNING CREATIVE SUITE

    sounds like some ***** propaganda from linux losers hoping Adobe will take the bait and give them some actual software
  • EnderMB, on 08/21/2008, -0/+1If anything Microsoft should acquire Adobe instead of pursuing Yahoo. With Flash, Photoshop, Reader and the rest of their fantastic software under MS ownership they could effectively destroy Apple's stance in the creative industry.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.