Adobe Photoshop May Possibly Become Microsoft Photoshop

[raymondcruz]

I was a mac user before when I started designing all I know if it were not for Adobe I don't have no reason to buy mac that time.

if it were not for MS apple may have not bring into existence the Iphone, IPAD and Ipod, for me apple always sets the bar high, very competitive company. I see the future, (MSPhotoshop) what's ahead for me is catastrophe. all IE version nga di maayos ng microsoft tsk...tsk... hirap tuloy mag web design hehehe.

teka sumakit bangs ko ang tindi ng diskusyon hahahaha 

• Tweet

[davidmakulit]

Since wala naman strong graphics presence ang microsoft, Microsoft we'll probably get a lot more from this deal , I mean the technology patents and owning the number one graphics software we'll make them a lot of moolah.  Yung office productivity software naman nila ang talagang malakas, yung other ventures nila not as dominating .. sana this turns out to be a good thing for our beloved photoshop hopefully lower prices? Sana palitan na ang paintbrush ng elements as default.

• Tweet

[caterpillar]

look precisely at the ipad. what are you buying? the physical item of the ipad. I said apple generates its revenue through hardware sales. it primarily survives because it can push hardware sales keeping to keep it afloat. therefore it is a hardware company.

  You're a bit slow kid. The parts of that ipad is generic and can be found off-the-shelf. Why is it that others can't rival it even if it is cheaper? It's because it is software that makes it good. That is why the competitors are still out there in R&D perfecting their own iPAD. They will be ready one year behind in 2011, maybe even more.

does that make ibm, hp and other pc manufacturers "software companies" for making it's hardware from off the shelf items? they obtain these hardware and sell them as a package, branding their name on it. sounds like apple right?

   You can't seem to read what I wrote before. And that is why they folded. Because they saw themselves as HW companies. Think about it, kid. If anyone can do it, . You still haven't been able to answer my point on the issue that if it is off-the-shelf (OTS) parts, why is it that nobody yet has made one that is as good as the ipad? Asus is HW company, right? So is Lenovo! Now answer this - if it is really about hardware, why can't they make an iPAD clone, if the parts are OTS? The reason? they don't have a software that runs it as good as Apple!

  It's the software.

in addition, all apple devices such as the iphone, ipad and itouch have the a4 architecture among others and they are all apple propriety. they only switched to intel for macbooks in 2005 because they were tanking as a hardware company (and were left no choice but to outsource). but the fact of the matter is, apple generates revenue through hardware sales, not software. infact, windows runs so well in these new macbooks, their sales spiked in the intel switch.

You forget that the old processor was also outsourced. In fact, only Apple then really made significant purchases of the processor than anybody else. 

 If Intel as you claimed is "outsourced," then all other parts will run with it and it becomes a OTS component w/c your competitors have access too. So, again, I ask you - if parts are all OTS, the same price range for the OTS parts, where is the competitive advantage now?  Why can't competitors duplicate the ipad or itunes?

  Admit it, it's the software that made the difference!

they sell macbooks, not osx. their "software suites" are outsourced to make you buy their hardware. heck, osx was obtained from NeXT making them another unix system. tell me again, what are their products and what are they? you will say that mac software makes them mac. but it is , mac hardware sales that keeps them afloat. that's their business.

  But OSX is the platform that runs it. That's where the apps run. Take that away and you have nothing. If MS didn't have windows, then the apps won't run. In fact, that is what keeps MS affloat, Windows. And what is mac OSX?

  It's a software, kid. It's the software.

microsoftsand apple go hand in hand. in apple shops you can buy windows 7 with your new mac (at least those abroad afaik). microsoft has also bailed out apple computers in 1997 (a heftly $150m sum) as a partnership to apple. in terms that their software be available on their hardware. that's because they are not in direct competition.

  I won't belabor this as this is irrelevant to the discussion. But trust me, they are going to be competitors AGAIN. If MS buys out Adobe, and pushes it in the mac, trust me, it's going to be war again.

let's take another look at snow leopard. you can't buy for use in new computers, but you buy it for existing mac hardware. it doesn't even have any sort of copy protection. it doesn't phone home, it doesn't have a serial number and you can use it as many times as you want. on what? mac hardware.

Why do you ignore the fact that you can install Max OS in a PC? Here, watch it and weep.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8oVU5AjqhU&feature=related
	Small | Large

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmTCuNxpR_M&feature=related# (Embedding disabled, limit reached)

There's more but just go to youtube or any usenet and they'll show you how it's done. Are you the only one clueless about this? 

Legalities aside, it demonstrates that the parts that you claim Apple is proprietary is OTS. OSX can run in a PC HW. You can ignore this reality and bury your head in the sand or would you care to explain the videos?

have you used macs before the intel switch? g4, g3 processors are all apple hardware. they make their laptops all special because of its hardware. its only recently that jobs decided to call it a "software company". it was called apple computers, not apple software. look into the history of apple. what have they done? why are they still afloat? what are they selling?


not trying to get personal but since when have you been using apple? since they switched to intel? do you even know what makes an apple computer an apple computer?

 
  Why do I have to use an OS to know if it works or not?  You guys have the same MO. If you start scraping the barrels to answer to defend your position,  you attack the person or you throw in the "have you used the stuff gambit!"  Have I used a DEC OS? No, but I know it was good. Have I used a Wang OS? Nope, seen only it, but it was good. Have I used a OSX, yes, but not a heavy or even casual user.

 You have to ask yourself this question, not me. If you are going to pull the "i have experience and you don't routine" on me, then I will pull out my cards too. I will pull my "I have experience and even more" cards too, even if I don't want to (as I believe logic is enough really to rebutt your position). Not pulling rank on you, I have a grad degree on tech mg't and the history of computing is one of my specialties. I have books in my shelves now on most major efforts in the computing industry, and made term papers with a 1.0 grade on the subject with a final grade of 1.0 on it in many occassions. When I  have gotten my degree, i have given seminars and was a consultant on tech forecasting and assessment based on tech and their direction.  I have changed policy directions of companies based on my recommendation and assessments because my report and analyses can break or make a company as a consutant and an employee. I get paid to make this call as a consultant and employee because if I can't determine the CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR of a company or a technology, then I am sinking not just the company but myself as well. I am also endangering the jobs of others in my firm who rely on their jobs to earn a living. It is not a hypothetical or dura sa hangin debate for me or some armchair prognostication.

  Are you willing to stake your reputation and the viability of the company the same way? I know I have and will always lay it on the line. I have to know what I am doing. The price is too high to pay to be wrong if I don't call it right! 


  And yes, Apple is a software company. Any MBA with the know-how to analyze a firm knows this. And even if you don't' have an MBA, your own admission that they outsource their manufacturing then what does that make Apple? HP does not make it's own computers anmore, and so with Compaq, and so with Dell. But why do people buy them? Because it's MS software that makes "their" outsourced product viable. If Apple removed that restriction on the OSX, mind you, nobody will buy the more expensive mac. It's the same way that you can buy any brand of HW to run windows. It's less painful because MS allows you to use it on different HW brand or parts it is compatible with. So, which is the critical success factor? Which one really drives the PC sales? Is it the HW or the SF?

  FYI, ECS, the notebook maker used to make the mac for Apple. ECS sold their division and plant to Asus sometime 2003 or so, who nows makes the mac for Apple. I am sure, if Apple is smart, they have Quanta or another company on the side too to make the same MAC for them. And they all use the same OTS parts! And it's not Apple who is making them! So, what makes Apple an Apple? Where is the competitive advantage of a firm if the HW is outsourced, the parts OTS? It's in their software. And they do the R&D and tweak it on their own.

  If they are a HW company and they are NOT THE ONE REALLY MAKING their stuff, then what business are they are really in? Why are they successful if your competitor can duplicate the same HW?

 The answer is simple - It is not hardware but software that made the difference. It is not HW that drives the competitiveness of today's firms. It is software (and service).

  IF Apple did use NEXT from another company and it succeeded, then it is the software that did it. NEXT just didn't know how to use the software. Not any different with IBM who thought contracted MS to make OS/2 but failed because their execution was bad. Guess what, MS copied the idea and used and the rest is history. It's software kid.

  Here's another history for you.  The Apple Lisa. Jobs put there millions to make it happen. It failed. Why? Was it the hardware that was the problem? Nope, poor software not matching the hw. The idea was good, but the implementation was bad in software. Mind you, this project was very dear to Jobs. Why? The Lisa was named after his daughter and he wanted her name to lead the new GUI. But poor software that was slow and buggy killed it.

  In 1994 or so, they came out with the Newton. It failed. They abandoned it in 1997 or so.

  2 years later, much cheaper, even simpler, the PALM took off. It's even made with OTS parts. The difference? The software. Apple's Newton is more robust and better in HW, but the simpler and cheaper Palm, proved that it's not the HW. It's the software that made it successful.

  You can call Apple a HW company, but if you fail to respond to the proof I have given you, then you can live in your own dream world and believe that it is a HW company. But it will never explain why competitors can't match  it knowing it is the same OTS parts and it's manufacturing is outsourced.  Surely it is just plain to see, that the edge comes from somewhere else, right? The world since the 1980's know that we are now in the service and software economy/world. The competitive advantage of Apple and any other companies of today now rests on software and services. You just use the HW as a platform to launch your products that will use that software or service. I can cite you Nokia (w/c I wont' start because that's another world) vs Motorola and show you that its' the SW that was the critical success factor for Nokia even if the invention of the cell phone (to the tune of about U$225M in R&D for 17 years) was made by Motorola.

  Riddle me this - IBM stands for International Business Machines. For 100 years or so, it has made HW. Tell me how many products that is of computer or HW it makes now. Tell me where its main revenues come from now? So, is IBM in the hardware business or not? It's name is of HW. But is it now in the HW business. It even sold it's notebook division even if it was profitable years ago (now Lenovo). So, this is supposed to be a HW company, right? What is its main business now?

  A company can call itself a HW company if it wants to, like IBM. But that can be in name only. It's edge or what drives it may no longer be the hardware itself.  A CEO worth his salt better know what his competitive advantage is and parlay that. Even if a company makes products, the mantra is service and software. And Apple, even if you see products coming out of it, has its competitive advantage in software. The reason why Apple slumbered for some years when he was not CEO was because Apple thought only as a HW company. But when Jobs took over again, innovative products came out. And those products will not happen without the true backbone that made the OTS parts and outsourced manufacturing drove these products. It's the software, kid. It's the software.

• Tweet

[mitzpicardal]

IBM, HP and Apple are software companies. I don't need to explain. Caterpillar's post is nosebleed enough  . If you really want to know PM me for my fees  .

And soon Apple will become a school. Apple University is coming soon  . So hindi na sya software company. Paaralan na sya  .

• Tweet

[Marcel]

IBM, HP and Apple are software companies. I don't need to explain. Caterpillar's post is nosebleed enough  . If you really want to know PM me for my fees  .

I agree. Apple is a software company because they developed OS X, iOS and their various applications to run on commodity hardware components.

IBM and HP are also software companies. IBM has Lotus Notes, DB2 and their various OSes for their mainframes, AS/400, and even PC-DOS for desktops/laptops. HP also has enterprise-level software such as HP Openview and Mercury, to name a few.

Wait. Why can't Apple, IBM, HP be both hardware and software companies?   

• Tweet

[chaloy]

Apple sells hardware, software and content. They change their company name to reflect the diversity of their business

• Tweet

[estib]

Regarding apple as the software as their selling point, it's true but you can't disregard that the hardware play a big part too. Not all hardware are off the shelves, some of their hardware are proprietary and they have patents on some of the technology. Like iPad, iPhone, Ipod touch, to me the software is just part of it the biggest advance on it, is the touch screen technology, which I believe that Apple have patent on it. Without the responsive mutli-touch touch screen, it just wouldn't be the same.

Back to the topic, if Microsoft does acquire Adobe it doesn't going make much difference in the Adobe software. It's not like Microsoft going to fire every Adobe employee and start everything from scratch.

• Tweet

[What]

 You're a bit slow kid. The parts of that ipad is generic and can be found off-the-shelf. Why is it that others can't rival it even if it is cheaper? It's because it is software that makes it good. That is why the competitors are still out there in R&D perfecting their own iPAD. They will be ready one year behind in 2011, maybe even more.

you are the one that's slow and have bitten into the bs steve jobs has been doing in his presentations and the apple commercials. i never said that apple didn't develop software. they make software too but the truth of the matter is their revenue comes from hardware sales. look up what revenue means. apple makes their money in hardware sales. have you been to the many apple stores lately? what they sell are the macbooks, ipads, iphones, ipods. not osx, ios or iphoto.

I'm talking about the business standpoint. don't go talking about it being a software company just because they have their software because in reality they are a hardware company for selling hardware. I'm not ignoring the fact you can install osx on a pc. but does apple make revenue when you install  osx  on a pc? clearly no. I don't think you get this, but these companies are in it for the revenue and for appple, that's hardware sales. baka ikaw ang kelangan mag mba.

• Tweet

[pitbull]

i think that they earn money from both. these companies have their capabilities to manufacture the components,although the majority of the parts are subcontracted to other contractors,then assembled by themselves. its hard to isolate whether they make money solely on hardware or software sales alone.

iPhone example:
hardware - foxconn
software - apple in-house

sa huli kailangan din nila kumita from both dahil ang RnD etc ginastos na nila. manufacturing na lang ang pinapagawa nila labas at assembly for this particular product. i think it is more accurate to call apple an electronics/consumer electronics and computers company,which relies on both key components, software and hardware...dagdag ko lang,pag negosyante ka,lahat kailangan pagkakitaan,software,hardware pati na accessories,rights at branding. as in lahat

teka ang layo na ng nilihis natin

from adobe napunta sa MS then now apple  

• Tweet

[Marcel]

Back on topic, the Adobe - Microsoft alliance or merger might have the following consequences:

- Adobe engineers get more access to Microsoft's Windows technology and are able to optimize the Creative Suite further on that platform.

- Microsoft integrates Adobe technology into their existing products, like PDF printing within Windows, Flash video, or having a new MS Paint with Photoshop Elements technology as mentioned above. 

- Microsoft Creative Suite would probably cost a lot, but Adobe CS5 is already quite expensive. Plus we've seen that Microsoft is willing to provide low-cost solutions such as ad-supported Word and Excel, and Windows Basic, so we might see a similar thing with Microsoft Photoshop.

- If Adobe has the Creative Suite Master Collection, Microsoft launches its Microsoft Creative Office Suite Ultimate 2012 with Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Access, Outlook, Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Acrobat, Flash Builder, Dreamweaver, Fireworks, Premiere, AfterEffects, Soundbooth. 

- Or... we end up typing letters and making spreadsheets in Microsoft Photoshop. 

• Tweet

[flxrms]

Ok lang yan..para madagdag sa MSDN subscription ko yung Photoshop yahooooooooooooooo

• Tweet

[totoybato]

you are the one that's slow and have bitten into --snip-- baka ikaw ang kelangan mag mba.

Apple is a software and hardware company. Although they don't manufacture 100% of hardware components but they get them through partners/component manufacturers. They just give the design specifications. Motorola yung lumang CPU nila before the switched to Intel. But basically they designed their own systems.

Apple products, if you check their history, you cannot do much about the Macintosh(s) -- yes they were called the Macintosh(es) and they were closed systems; software and Hardware. Check out the Apple Lisa.

Our first computer was a Apple MacSE/30 circa 1989. They were selling both OS and hardware--together. I encountered other several Apple computers: Quadras, MacFX, etc. I think Apple was the one who popularized the term "Plug and  Play" coz you can easily plug an apple printer, external drives easily-- something not easily possible with the old PCs before. Teka--pahirapan pa pala ng installation ng 3rd party external drives nun dati. Hirap at ang mahal magdagdag lang ng RAM.

So, up until now, basically Software and Hardware sila kasi yung Apple logo e naka stamp sa din hardware nila. The way I experienced Apple products then and now ganun pa rin tingin ko. I've read hundreds of materials about Apple... Did you know that for a time time Apple licensed companies to develop Macintosh Clones with original Apple OS just to win costumers? Do you know that Bill Gates helped Steve Jobs regain control of Apple company by investing millions on it before? Steve Jobs was kicked out of Apple before and he came back with a revenge, etc, etc. Read Apple's history...

Ayoko na magsulat ng pagka-habahaba kasi very off topic na ito--not my style.

On Topic:  It's a strategy for MS--matalino si Bill Gates so alam niya kung papaano lalabanan Apple. This is not about the future of Adobe products--it may seem like it but its not 'coz Adobe is a reputable software company. MS just wants to "Level Up" with the competition.

• Tweet

[edwink]

OT: anyone have seen and remember the film "The Pirates of Silicon Valley?"

ON Topic: I think there will also be positive things, if this merger/acquisition happens.  maybe full windows GUI customization using photoshop with instant update at one click?    

• Tweet

[totoybato]

Yup ninakaw ni Steve Jobs yung idea ng Apple GUI from a Xerox hardware--if I remember it right. May computer na ginawa din yung Xerox. So hindi original yung idea ni Steve Jobs.

By the way, ang original na name ng Apple was Apple Computer, Inc. The dropped the "Computer" so Apple, Inc na lang--mas madali basahin.

Check out Apple's history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.

• Tweet

[zimatar]

Sana lang magmura din ang Photoshop kung totoo man ito. Hehehe.

• Tweet

[mitzpicardal]

Tumahimik na. Buti naman narealize nyo na ang Apple ay hindi software o hardware. Prutas sya. Fruitware.

Seriously, Photoshop is failing and dying slowly. It needs to be rewritten frest from start. I hope MS will do it just like what Autodesk is doing to Maya and 3DMax.  Lightwave and the other 3D programs Maya and 3DMax (Bought my a similar giant Autodesk) is doing it right now. We have very different hardware now than 10-15 years ago. With modern architecture, multithreading over multiple cores, full floating point pipeline, handling massive data sets, gigapixel images, we need a software than can go with these development. Sadly PS is an old house na renerenovate at pinipinturahan lang lagi. It's painfully slow even with a modern HW. Uses a lot or resources. Hindi sya nakakasabay sa HW development. Heck, it can't even handle more than 300,000 pixel. I have a few files now that PS cannot handle.

I'm thinking Lightroom will be a better future and Adobe/MS will attempt to reboot PS with Lightroom. Lightroom handles RAW files way much better than Photoshop.


I'm still waiting for a serious challenger (to PS) though.

• Tweet

[gpx4]

Ayan si Mitz!

Sino sa inyo may 300,000 pixel file itaas ang kamay!!!
 

Tumahimik na. Buti naman narealize nyo na ang Apple ay hindi software o hardware. Prutas sya. Fruitware.

Seriously, Photoshop is failing and dying slowly. It needs to be rewritten frest from start. I hope MS will do it just like what Autodesk is doing to Maya and 3DMax.  Lightwave and the other 3D programs Maya and 3DMax (Bought my a similar giant Autodesk) is doing it right now. We have very different hardware now than 10-15 years ago. With modern architecture, multithreading over multiple cores, full floating point pipeline, handling massive data sets, gigapixel images, we need a software than can go with these development. Sadly PS is an old house na renerenovate at pinipinturahan lang lagi. It's painfully slow even with a modern HW. Uses a lot or resources. Hindi sya nakakasabay sa HW development. Heck, it can't even handle more than 300,000 pixel. I have a few files now that PS cannot handle.

I'm thinking Lightroom will be a better future and Adobe/MS will attempt to reboot PS with Lightroom. Lightroom handles RAW files way much better than Photoshop.


I'm still waiting for a serious challenger (to PS) though.

• Tweet

[totoybato]

Heck, it can't even handle more than 300,000 pixel. I have a few files now that PS cannot handle.

I'm still waiting for a serious challenger (to PS) though.

You must be mistaken--300,000 pixels is even less than a 1 megapixel file (x-pixels by y-pixels). Are you referring to file size? like 300,000 megabytes or gigabytes?

A 5000x5000 pixel photo is actually 25,000,000 pixels square--yeah million pixels! Not to mention bit depth (8, 16, 32, 64, etc.)

Now, if your 300,000 plus pixels psd files has millions of layers inside it then--then it's no longer a 300,000 pixel file.

I believe Photoshop could actually handle large file sizes (or destroy you computer)--its just a matter of the Operating System and the amount of physical RAM and HD you have in your computer if they're large oenough to handle the requirements. That's the reason why there is still this "scratchdisk" feature or convention--our computers are limited by the amount of ram we can stick (or buy) to the motherboard as dictated by the OS. 64bit OS have allowed us to like say 16 Exabytes! I believe this is big enough for some large Photoshop files to float around.

• Tweet

[pitbull]

isa sa mga unang job ko is sa printing press nun 1998/99,naka handle ako ng 250+MB na file,hinihika na si pentium 2,mamamatay na si photoshop. save lang ginagawa o filter na simple 

this year,may 7GB file ako, para sa isang higanteng print sa jurong. antagal magsave. 64bit na quad na ito...

sa tingin ko is kailangan talaga ma optimize yun photoshop for current hardware. anlakas din nya lumamon ng memory. napapakamot na lang ako minsan kung saan napupunta yun memory,sa simpleng operation ng photoshop filter lang pala

but still,kahit na kayang ayusin ng MS yan,mas gugustuhin ko na mapunta sa artistically inclined na company yun adobe.

• Tweet

[totoybato]

I think that Photoshop still has room to grow based on the codes that the developer have developed for it. It's not like Nothing Real's/Apple's Shake that reached its programming limits that's why it was left as it is right now (with no further development) except for some high-end users who are clever enough to hack and add additional proprietary codes for it work to very demanding needs.

Like the famous saying: Nasa indian yan...  

• Tweet