Would you get Adobe Photoshop if available?

[synergynova]

Hi,

I was just wondering how many Ubuntu/Linux users would get Adobe Photoshop if it were available as a native distro for Ubuntu. Just to clarify, I'm talking about a version you would still have to pay for. I don't think it would be feasible to ask for a free version of Photoshop to be available.

I would certainly get it as I find the GIMP challenging to adapt to having used Photoshop for around 15 years now and have many .psd's that don't open correctly in the GIMP.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm loving Ubuntu and have used since 5.10 (Breezy Badger). I'm now running Edgy and looking forward to Fiesty.

Anyway, thoughts?

All the best
Woody

[lyceum]

As much as I want to say no, as an artist I fear that I may not have a choise as employers choose the programs and if I am going to get good at something I need to be able to practice. I would rather the GIMP got better or Photoshop opened their code but...

I do want to say that I am not a huge fan of Photoshop. My wife swears by it, but she uses a Mac, so go figure ;) Before using open source I had Photo Editor Pro, which is an amaizing program and VERY user friendly. I fear that is something GIMP and Photshop may never get right.

[hikaricore]

Hi,
having used Photoshop for around 15 years now and have many .psd's that don't open correctly in the GIMP.


Could be because they keep adding useless @$^# and changing their psd format with each release. At any rate just run PS in wine or with virtualbox/vmware, I don't see the point of a native release, it'll never happen.

[rossdh]

As much as I like open source software, I think there are some instances where I would rather pay for something top notch. The GIMP is a great tool, but for me it does not even come close to the useability of Photoshop. If Adobe would release Photoshop for Linux, I would definately buy it. Currently I use Photoshop for MacOS X. I would also like to see the other Creative Suite applications released for Linux.

[dsegarra]

Nonesense. I have been able to do everything with GIMP. IMO, there is no point of switching to Ubuntu if you really want to: 1. Contribute to the Open Source Community. 2. Want to use commercial applications. Might as well stay with windows.

Thats my opinion.

[P_Badger]

I've grown to love the Gimp 2.3 series to pieces, but as it stands, Photoshop 7 in Crossover Linux still rules the roost for obvious reasons.

Adobe has made it painfully clear with poor excuses and general bullsh!t that they'll never release a linux version. : P

[tom56]

I voted no because I can't afford it! If it was £50 I'd probably buy it.

[lyceum]

I've grown to love the Gimp 2.3 series to pieces, but as it stands, Photoshop 7 in Crossover Linux still rules the roost for obvious reasons.

Adobe has made it painfully clear with poor excuses and general bullsh!t that they'll never release a linux version. : P

I do not know. They seemed to go out of there way (in that they really had to do nothing at all) to make sure that Flash 9 worked with Linux (after passing us by with Flash 8). They may have learned something and they may be thinking twice. If not native, I would be happy if they worked with the people at WINE or crossover to make sure that it AT LEAST worked with one of these programs at the time of release. The future is clear, Window will not allways be the "only" OS.

[zorkerz]

Im sorry im not quite sure what you mean in the poll. Are you asking if we could buy a linux version would we or if we could have a linux version of photoshop for free? These obviously are very different questions. Thanxs

[eentonig]

Let's assume the current 'paying' model for Photoshop.

Yes, I would. Currently PS is one of those problems that force me to keep windows around. (correct, I consider it problems, not programs. Because of this reason)

I like games, but I can live with them.

But Photoshop and even f$ck*ng MS Visio are programs I can't live without and haven't found decent alternatives for.

Yes, there is the Gimp. But as I started out using the Gimp and only afterwards discovered the ease and joy of PS, I never want to switch back as long as they don't have the possibilities and ease of working that PS offers me.

And for Visio, I haven't found any program that suits my needs. So if MS would create a Linux variant for it, I would gladly pay them the money.

[P_Badger]

I do not know. They seemed to go out of there way (in that they really had to do nothing at all) to make sure that Flash 9 worked with Linux (after passing us by with Flash 8). They may have learned something and they may be thinking twice. If not native, I would be happy if they worked with the people at WINE or crossover to make sure that it AT LEAST worked with one of these programs at the time of release. The future is clear, Window will not allways be the "only" OS.

Well, A few days ago I stumbled across a "legendary" thread on the Adobe forums where one of the Adobe folks came out and gave the "too many Linux distros" excuse as to why they likely won't ever release a Linux version of Photoshop. Then, when confronted with the fact OS X is a Unix based os, they retorted with something to do about how X11 is teh Devil, etc etc.

Also, when it came up that CS and CS2 won't work on wine/crossover because of the copy protection, the fellow spat out that it is Wine's fault and not adobe's. Just seems to be a hateful little affair.

[Shay Stephens]

I voted no, but wanted to explain. I am a photographer, and I do use Photoshop 7 in wine. However, since Adobe went the activation route with CS, I have changed my mind about Photoshop. I purchased CS and CS2, but I don't want to support the activation scheme any longer. So I am not using them anymore. Instead, I am using Bibble pro to do my raw editing, and doing my batch web sizing of images in gimp. When it comes to text layout, I still need to have Photoshop 7 for that, but since it does not rely on activation, I am happy to use it.

If Adobe drops the activation in some future release, I would consider using it again if I needed it, but not until then.

[old_geekster]

Since I dual-boot, I use "Adobe Elements" in XP Pro. I don't do enough photo editing to justify paying for "Photoshop".

[synergynova]

Zorkerz, I've edited my original post for clarification.


So if MS would create a Linux variant for it, I would gladly pay them the money.
LOL, like MS would do that! ;)

Re: old_geekster - I think that's what it probably comes down to at the end of the day, what do you actually use your retrospective image editors for? For me Photoshop is a must for what I do.

Why shouldn't "Commercial software" be available for Linux, it's becoming more popular all the time with specific cases such as the French government switching to Ubuntu, education authorities over in the US moving entirely to Linux, not to mention the home user. They would be cutting out a great market share.

If they re-wrote it in BASIC, you could have platform specific emulators so everyone could use it ;) I had BASIC on my Spectrum+ and it ROCKED!:guitar: Surely they can see it's the way forward ;)

[lyceum]

Well, A few days ago I stumbled across a "legendary" thread on the Adobe forums where one of the Adobe folks came out and gave the "too many Linux distros" excuse as to why they likely won't ever release a Linux version of Photoshop. Then, when confronted with the fact OS X is a Unix based os, they retorted with something to do about how X11 is teh Devil, etc etc.

Also, when it came up that CS and CS2 won't work on wine/crossover because of the copy protection, the fellow spat out that it is Wine's fault and not adobe's. Just seems to be a hateful little affair.

That is too bad. I will not be getting a Mac or PC just for them, so if they want to be lazy they can loose a few few dollars and GIMP can keep improving.

[Auria]

If they re-wrote it in BASIC, you could have platform specific emulators so everyone could use it

Do you have any idea how slow that would be? :P

Photoshop is still better than GIMP, but upcoming versions 2.4 and 2.6 seem to be filling a lot of functionnality i've been always missing - and then it's 3.0 with GEGL integration. from there on nothing can stop GIMP ;) so i'd rather not buy photoshop

[kopilo]

I grew up with PaintShop, personally I have never seen a massive advatage to PhotoShop, but then again I mainly deal with rastor images. Recently I have been having a bit of fun with vector images using Xara Xtreme, I have seen very good and very bad images produced by people using photoshop. Thus I think at the end of the day it comes down to the skill of the artist, would I get photoshop?
No way, there are pleanty of free (ok) alternatives avaliable.
Would I get illustrator? Possibly.

I did this (http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c219/Koplio/kopilo_ubuntu_logo.png) using xara, it took me about 5 mintues.

[bullgr]

to use ubuntu or any linux distro in a professional workplace it must have some professional progs.

ok, gimp is great but you can't use it in a professional environment. gimp misses some serious
parts (cmyk) and many compatibility issues (psd).

the 10 most wanted progs in linux are (http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS2756049592.html)

1. Photoshop
2. Autocad
3. Dreamweaver
4. iTunes
5. Macromedia Studio
6. Flash
7. Quicken
8. Visio
9. Quickbooks
10. Lotus Notes

this answer the question... many people like linux but they can't use it for professional purposes.

i use ubuntu in home for my home usual need's (mp3, dvd, photos, email, web etc).
but in my work i use the damn winblows...
because i need photoshop, coreldraw, quark, ilustrator to do my work.
i can't use insteed of these, gimp, inkscape, scribus...

in your work you can't play around... you must DO the job.

[Auria]

. gimp misses some serious parts (cmyk)

though next version (2.4, due to be released during summer approx) will have basic cmyk support, and it is planned that version 2.6 comes out shortly after to complete cymk support

that's why i said gimp is not up to it yet, but in the future it will be a lot better

[thenme]

It might take all day to list the reasons I quit using windows, so I won't. However I will say that I didn't leave happy with it.
If the software company's are smart they figure out that I am not alone in abandoning windows, and many more want to just haven't yet based on reason's mentioned above and the fear of the unknown.
If software companies hope to stay in business they better start taking notes and getting something put together for the Linux market. I don't have a problem paying for a license to use software just a problem with a software company telling what I can do with the software I own. This is I thought what the concept of "free ware" was, and why I ultimately switched.

To answer the question though I would buy a native release. But I would rather send the folks at GIMP a check to aid in development of an industry standards equipped version.

I don't need WOW, I need works!

[NikoC]

I'm not really into the whole graphics 'thing' so for my needs Gimp is more than sufficient.

[xopher]

I voted yes, but there's always a but. Since Pixel is being developed, and is already linux native, that is a pretty viable option too. I'd have to try that one out first.

But for Adobe, investing in a linux version might be a good idea, because of the potential new threats/substitutes that are already available for linux.

[Robin Hood]

As a professional photographer/multi media producer Photoshop is a must for me. I have tried PS7 with crossover and it seems to work fine, but I really need some of the tools that were introduced with CS and CS2.

I am new to Ubuntu and have to say there are things about it that I love and some that I find frustrating, but for it to succeed I don't think it is about the OS itself but if the software that people want to use is available.

There will always be people with computer experience who will be happy to argue that the command line is a must - but for me and I suspect many others we just want an OS that lets us get on with the job. At the moment I support Ubuntu because I love the philosophy behind it..... But I have to use other OSs that let me get on with my day job.

The GIMP is an excellent tool for many but I am afraid it simply falls short for professional use. Maybe as it develops it will come up to scratch but it has a long way to go unfortunately.

Martin

[ArdentAdam]

I'm a graphic designer and I've recently downloaded both GIMP and Inkscape. I've tinkered around with them, and I find GIMP to be sub par to Photoshop (CS or CS2), but much more user friendly than I found Inkscape to be compared to Illustrator. Illustrator is, by far, the best program for vector drawing in terms of ease of use and functionality. In Illustrator I can change colors for fills and strokes in a matter of seconds...with Inkscape it took me nearly 10 minutes to figure out how to do that. It'll be a while before Inkscape is anywhere near as user-friendly as Illustrator.

I'll continue to use GIMP and Inkscape, but I'll also continue to use Windows with Adobe CS2 until suitable Linux replacements show up...which may be a looong time...or in the very near future. I think thats up in the air. I think there are definitely people out there who can make these kinds of high quality, user-friendly programs...programs on par with their commercial counterparts...it just takes time...and I'm sure a good bit of money.

It seems like software companies only produce programs for Windows and Mac operating systems because they are somehow thought to be more "proven" than Linux...or simply because they are more popular. That and people are much more afraid of Linux than the other two. However, since I upgraded to FeistyFawn, I've never had a crash and have learned not to mess with things I know nothing about until I've researched them. I'm a Linux noob so the first few re-installs were because of my curiosity and stupidity. I think out of the box, Linux is not as easy to figure out as some might make it seem. Having had 20 years of experience with Mac OS, and later on, Windows, I kinda slipped right into Linux and figured it out...but not everyone with a home machine has that kind of experience.

I have a feeling because its free, the average computer user thinks its a case of "you get what you pay for"...so they figure it's junk. The problem is...because they paid $XXX.XX for Windows...they think its tried and true and proven...yet on my fiance's XP machine, I have to restart it at least 2-3 times a day. I can run Linux continually for many days and never have to restart...only restarting when I've modified something that requires it.

Yes, Windows is not the only OS, but at the moment, people seem to be content to just restart Windows multiple times a day rather than get something that actually works. Its like OS/2...it worked far better than Windows ever did...but when that M$ ad budget kicked into high gear for Win95...OS/2 didn't stand a chance. There will always be better options...but they just might not always be the most popular...sadly. :(

[phidia]

Want a gimp that's more like photoshop?
Go here: http://gimpshopdotnet.blogspot.com/

I really prefer not to support adobe's attitude.

[darundal]

Yes. Plain and simple, yes.

[ArdentAdam]

Menu structure changes aside...it looks exactly the same as the original version. I'll just stick with the original GIMP. I've already learned it's menu structure. Seems like if they want to make it more like Photoshop, they should go about laying out the palettes and other features differently in a more compact fashion...not just change the menu structure so it looks a little more familiar. If the interface looked more like Photoshop and was as easy to use as Photoshop...then tack on the menu changes...and you're set.

One of my big gripes with the GIMP is that the palettes take up way too much space...especially the main toolbar. Of course you can resize them...but then some functions get lost, and besides, I only have a 15" LCD on my laptop to run it on...so I need all the space and functionality I can get. I know I might sound like an Adobe cheerleader, but they do know how to make better use of the space for actually editing the image rather than cluttering up the space with large clunky tool palettes.

Beyond that and a few other quirks with the program...I do like GIMP and find that with some more work, it could definitely catch up to Photoshop. I still do not care much for Inkscape. That program looks simple at first glimpse, but when you actually try to get into it...some simple functions that should only take mere seconds...can become a huge production. Also the interface is kind of buggy...with lots of graphical corruption...some palettes disappear when you try to do something with them...things like that. Its just not at the same level of polish as the GIMP is.

That said, I do hope they both continue to be developed and evolve into serious contenders.

[cantormath]

The Gimp Is Soooooooo Much Better Then Photoshop

[borisdaniel]

I have photoshop just wished i could have it running on ubuntu as well. The GIMP version of photoshop seems alienate to me.

If someone knows how to run photoshop ( or creative suite ) on ubuntu let me know,

boris

[freewill07]

Yes here. Photoshop is something that I use for every little picture edit or whatever...

[graigsmith]

i think half the people here saying they would get it would not pay for it. you guys DO know how much it costs right? it costs an outrageous amount on windows. they would probably charge even more for a linux version. $649 for the full version. I mean, i like photoshop, and it is the best. but i'm not willing to pay that much for it. i would pay 50 mabey 100 though.

[lyceum]

i think half the people here saying they would get it would not pay for it. you guys DO know how much it costs right? it costs an outrageous amount on windows. they would probably charge even more for a linux version. $649 for the full version. I mean, i like photoshop, and it is the best. but i'm not willing to pay that much for it. i would pay 50 mabey 100 though.

They make it for the Mac and that has a Unix kernel. Also, A photo shoot can cost around $500 to $5000. If I am going to shell out $1000 for the camera, $2000 or more for lenses and $2000+ on lights, what's another $700-$1000 for the best professional photo editing software? The only they make you learn in school? I have a friend who's wife makes about $3000+ a job doing photo work. think she made a sound investment on the Photoshop. I wish GIMP was that standard, but sadly for professionals, it is not.

[dasunst3r]

Another option I've heard about is called "Pixel." It is closed-source and requires you to pay, but do take a look at it and see if it's something worth paying for.

[P_Badger]

Pixel is in no way, shape, or form, ready for serious work. Most of the most basic features crash at random times, so not even simple work can be done on it. Try out the demo, at least, before putting any money down on it.

[PWill]

1. Photoshop
2. Autocad
3. Dreamweaver
4. iTunes
5. Macromedia Studio
6. Flash
7. Quicken
8. Visio
9. Quickbooks
10. Lotus Notes


1. GIMP or PS in Wine/VM
2. CADforLinux, gCAD3D, etc. Lots of Linux CADs.
3. Nvu, Screem, etc.
4. Rhythmbox and amaroK have almost all of the same features as iTunes, and then some
5. I hate Flash :)
6. See above. There is at least Flash 9 Player for Linux
7. TaxGeek - http://taxgeek.sourceforge.net/ also, the latest CrossoverOffice can do Quicken
8. Who would want an MS product!?! Dia - http://www.gnome.org/projects/dia/ - also, the latest CrossoverOffice can do Visio
9. Sql-Ledger - http://www.sql-ledger.org/ - also, the latest CrossoverOffice can do Quickbooks
10. Erm, there is a native version of Lotus Notes for Linux. It came out in the summer of '06...

[Ciddan]

Pixel is in no way, shape, or form, ready for serious work. Most of the most basic features crash at random times, so not even simple work can be done on it. Try out the demo, at least, before putting any money down on it.

Well. It's not THAT bad. I plunked down the money for it and it's alright. I will agree that it is not ready for production work, but you can do quite alot with it. The project really has alot of potential, but it seems to be moving along slowly.

The upcoming beta 7 promises to fix alot of bugs, but its been delayed time after time so... Anyway, when beta 7 gets its release - Pixel is definatley worth a good look.

[ceciliaFX]

I like GIMP.

I find it easier to use than Photoshop


Anyway, the only really important program I have to use in Windows is AfterEffects. I don't think there's anything similar in linux, but I could be wrong.

[P_Badger]

Well. It's not THAT bad. I plunked down the money for it and it's alright. I will agree that it is not ready for production work, but you can do quite alot with it. The project really has alot of potential, but it seems to be moving along slowly.

The upcoming beta 7 promises to fix alot of bugs, but its been delayed time after time so... Anyway, when beta 7 gets its release - Pixel is definatley worth a good look.

You've actually been able to, say, use the text tool without it crashing on you? All I've been able to do is simple colouring of line work, and after about half an hour of use had it stop working on me.

[jrusso2]

I would not pay the exorbitant price of an application like Photoshop unless I was making money using it.

Since I am not I am happy to use the free alternatives.

[jrusso2]

to use ubuntu or any linux distro in a professional workplace it must have some professional progs.

ok, gimp is great but you can't use it in a professional environment. gimp misses some serious
parts (cmyk) and many compatibility issues (psd).

the 10 most wanted progs in linux are (http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS2756049592.html)

1. Photoshop
2. Autocad
3. Dreamweaver
4. iTunes
5. Macromedia Studio
6. Flash
7. Quicken
8. Visio
9. Quickbooks
10. Lotus Notes

this answer the question... many people like linux but they can't use it for professional purposes.

i use ubuntu in home for my home usual need's (mp3, dvd, photos, email, web etc).
but in my work i use the damn winblows...
because i need photoshop, coreldraw, quark, ilustrator to do my work.
i can't use insteed of these, gimp, inkscape, scribus...

in your work you can't play around... you must DO the job.

IBM has made Lotus Notes Available for Linux

[mech7]

Coudln't we make a petition or something the poll was from 2006 and allready had 10.000 votes for photoshop... the price for one license PS is € 899.00

€ 899.00 x 10.000 = €8.990.000 for that kind of money adobe is more then able to port it to linux and make decent profit.

Maybe if there is a signup form where it states that you order it when it comes to linux adobe must do something about it.. they are not fools to turn down that amount of money :confused:

[lyceum]

Coudln't we make a petition or something the poll was from 2006 and allready had 10.000 votes for photoshop... the price for one license PS is € 899.00

€ 899.00 x 10.000 = €8.990.000 for that kind of money adobe is more then able to port it to linux and make decent profit.

Maybe if there is a signup form where it states that you order it when it comes to linux adobe must do something about it.. they are not fools to turn down that amount of money :confused:

With Linux moving to Dell, the attention Adobe gave us with Flash 9 beta and so many governments and people in general moving to Linux/Gnu it will only be time. I say that if they do not want to give us photoshop, then we should spend the money on GIMP to get it going faster. Did you know that as big and old as GIMP is they have no commercial backing? Maybe if we were shelling $800 out to them they could get to 3.o faster and maybe even over take PhotoShop. In my opinion, art is the last place FOSS needs to capture to win. FOSS is already better than XP or Vista, OOo my not be the best, but it does have advantages over MS (even though MS office still has something over OOo) ect. Blender is really getting there and GIMP changing their underlying engine (I think for 2.6) and from what I understand this new engine will really get the ball rolling again.

:guitar:

[mech7]

With Linux moving to Dell, the attention Adobe gave us with Flash 9 beta and so many governments and people in general moving to Linux/Gnu it will only be time. I say that if they do not want to give us photoshop, then we should spend the money on GIMP to get it going faster. Did you know that as big and old as GIMP is they have no commercial backing? Maybe if we were shelling $800 out to them they could get to 3.o faster and maybe even over take PhotoShop. In my opinion, art is the last place FOSS needs to capture to win. FOSS is already better than XP or Vista, OOo my not be the best, but it does have advantages over MS (even though MS office still has something over OOo) ect. Blender is really getting there and GIMP changing their underlying engine (I think for 2.6) and from what I understand this new engine will really get the ball rolling again.

:guitar:

Well I do like the Gimp and appreciate the effort but at the moment it is nowehere near PS CS3.. and the development could take years and years before they are able to deliver anything comparable. And if you are making your money with graphics you need a solution now not over 10 year ;)
I doubt Dell will have an influence though.. and i saw recently a post from Adobe employee that there are currently no plans to port to linux while obviously it is the most wanted software, and required for allot of people to make a "full" switch or even dare to try linux.

[justin whitaker]

I would totally buy Photoshop for Linux, or even Creative Suite 3 Linux edition. There are some commercial software that it would be fabu if I could run it natively on the OS of my choice: Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Reason, MS Office 2007...even WINE based versions would be worth having.

[zgornel]

I would get Photoshop for linux, then the crack. Enter.

[barmazal]

Good idea why wouldn't we start donating money to Gimp developers so those poor students can exit their job and start making first ever good Linux based Image Editor? I don't want it to be 100% CS3 but CS2 would be awesome. I'm up for it this will make stinky Abode who dislike Microsoft who steals their technology but still work with them to cry why they never used Linux revenue.

Linux ppl are hippies and not just those who want free software, we are ready to pay. Just give us an ability.