Adobe on Intel not 'til Q2 2007, CS3

[sscutchen]

As the developer sees it, the work required to create a Universal version of the now year-old CS2 combined with the fact that high-end Mac desktops aren't available yet would offer slim reward.

"It's far better to focus on making sure Photoshop CS3 is able to absolutely squeeze every ounce of power out of what I'm sure will be pretty spankin' Intel-based towers by that point than to do tons of work moving an old code base to new tools," he said.

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=14195

Here's the original blog from Adobe:

By now you have probably figured out that we aren't releasing Universal Binaries of our current application versions. If you haven't, all you need to know is pretty explicitly spelled out here.

"But, c'mon", I hear people saying, "Steve said it was just a recompile!" Or, "Back during the PowerPC transition, you guys released a patch!"

Well, this time is different. And I really wish it weren't. But let me tell you how...

http://blogs.adobe.com/scottbyer/2006/03/macintosh_and_t.html

[Silencio]

Yeah, the blog explains the technical issues pretty well. The word circulating around is that Q2 2007 is a very conservative estimate. Think Secret believes CS3 will be out before the end of 2006, but I also doubt that very much.

[chas_m]

I really don't see why this is a big deal to ANYBODY.

The entire Adobe suite RUNS on Intel -- just a bit more slowly than it did on the G4/G5? Is that a problem? Then hold on to your G4/G5 for a little while.

The kinds of people who run Adobe products are professionals using said products to EARN A LIVING. They already have G5s loaded with tons of RAM (which Rosetta seems to need even more than the OS), so their experience on a G5 is going to be great, and on an Intel it might fall to "quite good."

Given that tower Macs will be the LAST to receive the Intel update, I really don't see what the fuss is about.

Far more important is now knowing roughly WHEN CS3 IS COMING OUT. This allows people to make plans, something they couldn't do when the release was totally unknown.

The Adobe problem is a minor inconvenience, not a major debacle. For major debacles, anybody here remember how many YEARS it took Quark to get its act together for OS X??

[Refurbvirgin]

Meanwhile, anyone wanting to utilize the latest and trickest Adobe software can always install Windows on their new mac.

:-)

[pRON aHOLIC]

First of all, Adobe is no Quark, they have the resources to pull it off.

Second, If you have to buy now then it DOES matter, just because YOU don't need it doesn't make it a big deal.

My work is buying laptops NOW and we have to deal with CS2 running on Rosetta. No way are we going to tell them to buy the G4 to get dead ended in a year. They will not be buying after this for another 2-3 years for laptops so we need to make the best long term solution NOW.

The version of Photoshop 7 for 9/OSX transition came out within 6 months after OSX not a year.



chas_m Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I really don't see why this is a big deal to
> ANYBODY.
>
> The entire Adobe suite RUNS on Intel -- just a bit
> more slowly than it did on the G4/G5? Is that a
> problem? Then hold on to your G4/G5 for a little
> while.
>
> The kinds of people who run Adobe products are
> professionals using said products to EARN A
> LIVING. They already have G5s loaded with tons of
> RAM (which Rosetta seems to need even more than
> the OS), so their experience on a G5 is going to
> be great, and on an Intel it might fall to "quite
> good."
>
> Given that tower Macs will be the LAST to receive
> the Intel update, I really don't see what the fuss
> is about.
>
> Far more important is now knowing roughly WHEN CS3
> IS COMING OUT. This allows people to make plans,
> something they couldn't do when the release was
> totally unknown.
>
> The Adobe problem is a minor inconvenience, not a
> major debacle. For major debacles, anybody here
> remember how many YEARS it took Quark to get its
> act together for OS X??
>
> chas_m
>
>
> "I, for one, welcome our new Intel Overlords!"