PDA

View Full Version : Adobe CS5 Products with Wine



dannymichel
April 27th, 2010, 03:13 AM
Anybody test any of them out yet?

techrush
April 27th, 2010, 04:52 AM
just gonna venture a geuss and say it will probably be at least a year before this becomes feasible.

Khakilang
April 27th, 2010, 05:02 AM
I don't think so it will work even with the latest release but somehow it is alright to use Lucid Lynx on Adobe Photoshop CS4 with Wine. You have to wait another year or so to see.

http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=14318&sAllBugs

sandyd
April 27th, 2010, 05:05 AM
nah. as long as they fix the famous photoshop cs4 installer error, we should have support in ~6 mo. this is because photoshop is a high piority application, so it has more attention.

MasterNetra
April 27th, 2010, 05:10 AM
I'll have to download the trial version and see if I have any luck. Not betting on it though. But ya never know unless you try.

dannymichel
April 27th, 2010, 05:36 AM
i agree. i think it will be about a year, just to get it succesfully installed on someone's system

cariboo
April 27th, 2010, 05:47 AM
I say why bother, if you can afford the software, you can afford a separate computer to run it on.

dannymichel
April 27th, 2010, 05:50 AM
I say why bother, if you can afford the software, you can afford a separate computer to run it on.
i dont think people choose to run linux because they can't afford the software, or another computer

cariboo
April 27th, 2010, 05:53 AM
I say why spend a lot of money on a software package only to have it run poorly using wine.

dannymichel
April 27th, 2010, 05:55 AM
I say why spend a lot of money on a software package only to have it run poorly using wine.
i guess some people dual boot, and try to install on both. others, such as myself get the software for free from clients and/or sponsors

d_skillz
April 27th, 2010, 06:06 AM
True words, anyone who rally wants to use photoshop, render any high quality artwork either needs to dual boot or use a seperate PC for that. The performance gap is just not worth it through WINE.

v1ad
April 27th, 2010, 07:50 AM
I say why bother, if you can afford the software, you can afford a separate computer to run it on.

thats besides the point. the goal is to be able to run the program on the OS that you prefer. like the same reason we use linux.

user1397
April 27th, 2010, 08:16 AM
Besides a lot of people pirate photoshop anyway, but they can't pirate computers.

cariboo
April 27th, 2010, 08:27 AM
I thought the goal was to get a Linux native version of Photoshop, If everyone keeps using the Windows version, Adobe is just going to say why bother.

I would suggest everyone watch this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoYL4R3Te2s), the guy comes up with a good way to nudge Adobe.

asddf
April 27th, 2010, 09:10 AM
Adobe is the only way to get Ubuntu to a big audience.

dannymichel
April 27th, 2010, 10:18 AM
Adobe is the only way to get Ubuntu to a big audience.

http://blogs.computerworld.com/15991/ubuntu_would_welcome_adobe_to_linux

dannymichel
April 30th, 2010, 11:12 PM
thats besides the point. the goal is to be able to run the program on the OS that you prefer. like the same reason we use linux.i agree. that statement he made, made no sense. we want to run it on linux

juancarlospaco
May 1st, 2010, 12:27 AM
Adobe products keeps lacking features i want on these kind of software...

phrostbyte
May 1st, 2010, 02:49 AM
Adobe is the only way to get Ubuntu to a big audience.

I don't know why everyone keeps begging for Adobe products. The only one they have given us causes a lot of rage (Flash). Who is to say even if they port CS to Linux it won't be a crappy port? You think they'd actually recode to target GTK+ or something? That's an insane amount of work.

Might as well run it on Wine, or at least convince Adobe to test it on Wine. This is by all means far far easier on them and more reasonable request to ask of them anyway.

stmiller
May 1st, 2010, 05:26 AM
Older versions of photoshop work ok in wine.

AmbientOcclusion
May 1st, 2010, 06:27 AM
I saw CS4 run on Michael Natkin's (http://herbivoracious.com/about.html) dev platform/workstation here in Seattle. He seems pretty cool and I think, supports open source. These are the kind of folks Linux users need to talk to directly.

A Linux port exists, but there is a political economy that surrounds it and really Adobe doesn't care about much but the bottom line. When they mention that there isn't a user base, they are lying. The number one customer of Adobe Products is EDMC Education Management Corporation, which owns all of the Art Institutes in the US. That is where the bulk of their profits come from. Without EDMC they would take a substantial hit. EDMC specifically uses Windows and OS X because of deals with M$ and Apple. As far as other users , my guess is the defection to Ubuntu and Linux would be massive if these products were ported.

Talk to the developers and people working specifically on products.

The real bottom line for Adobe is that they are losing money big time. I know of about 12 artists who are now refusing to purchase Adobe Products and are using pirated versions in protest. These are folks who have always played by the rules and have licensed every piece of software, but are sick of paying MAC prices for older PC hardware, running OS's that need AV software firewall internet suites and UAC's. They want simple, responsive Operating systems that don't get in the way. Only Linux can do this.

Don't forget Photoshop used to be ported to Linux and Irix until version 3 and they were paid to stop producing it. They cited a decline in SGI sales, but really this wasn't the case. Maya has worked really well in Linux for sometime, as does Fusion and Shake.

I think maybe looking at Apple's recent hostility towards Adobe could make a whole new market for them.

Otherwise, I think you are going to see artists increasingly pirate Adobe products in protest.

I have purchased Maya for Linux every edition it has been available. It is worth it to me.

michaelnatkin
May 3rd, 2010, 07:43 PM
Hi. This is Michael Natkin at Adobe. I don't know who AmbientOcclusion is. I do work at the Seattle office, but on After Effects, not Photoshop. I've never run wine or, for that matter, Linux, in my life. So I'd take those comments with a grain of salt. I do appreciate the link to my food blog though :).

dannymichel
May 6th, 2010, 10:27 PM
i run linux. i don't feel windows is worth the cost. i do, however, feel adobe products are. i would gladly pay for creative suite 6 if it were available for linux.
adobe is only losing money here

TDK800
May 9th, 2010, 04:12 AM
Just tried installing Adobe Photoshop CS5 - installer gives error.

I remember I ran Photoshop CS4 on Ubuntu, but not sure if through Wine or through Windows with Virtualbox.

lancerocke
May 9th, 2010, 04:19 AM
Just tried installing Adobe Photoshop CS5 - installer gives error.

I remember I ran Photoshop CS4 on Ubuntu, but not sure if through Wine or through Windows with Virtualbox.

cs4 runs after using winetricks

el-mar01
May 9th, 2010, 10:07 AM
Hi. This is Michael Natkin at Adobe. I don't know who AmbientOcclusion is. I do work at the Seattle office, but on After Effects, not Photoshop. I've never run wine or, for that matter, Linux, in my life. So I'd take those comments with a grain of salt. I do appreciate the link to my food blog though :).

Well what AmbientOcclusion said is a hell of a thing to make up then. Sounds like to me that you are just trying to cover your tracks Micheal.

nordstern
May 11th, 2010, 03:42 AM
Portable version of Photoshop Cs5 can work with wine but there are some problems.

lancerocke
May 11th, 2010, 03:49 AM
oh? what problems are those?

MasterNetra
May 11th, 2010, 05:04 AM
Portable version of Photoshop Cs5 can work with wine but there are some problems.

A portable version of CS5 has been made...already?

nordstern
May 11th, 2010, 01:31 PM
@lancerocke,
some net 2.0 framework error, Text tool not working

@MasterNetra,
It's not offical but it's working and it's only 64 mb.

(Sorry for my broken english)

timehAndGod
May 18th, 2010, 03:24 AM
It would be awesome to get the Photoshop CS5 portable version working in Wine. It loads for me, except crashes when I try to do anything :(

MasterNetra
May 18th, 2010, 04:16 AM
I would love to see Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Illustrator, and Flash CS running well in wine, those are what I need for my work. Started my own web design company last month, thanks to ITT-tech I already have a client, though I'm not completely up and running site or otherwise, still trying figure out pricing in general. I mean I'm not even sure exactly how to be charging or what would be a good low rate to start with to attract customers...At moment I'm charging my client $25 per page for a basic website (To make)(w/o flash) and maybe $50 a month for maintenance. However not sure if I should keep it that low...but I digress.

Johnsie
May 18th, 2010, 11:27 AM
Wine's ok for some apps but here's what I would do for apps that don't work with Wine:




Get the relevant download from http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/3.2.0_BETA3/


Install it


Create a new virtual machine and install Windows in it.


Start the virtual machine in "Seemless Mode" (This is the important bit!)

You will have the windows start bar at the bottom of your Ubuntu screen. You can run any Windows app. You can have Windows windows and Ubuntu windows side by side.



If your machine is of decent spec it should run without noticably affecting performance


For me this is way better than dual booting because I have the full functions of both operating systems at the same time. Any questions send me a PM. I'll try to get some screenshots up when I get home from work.

ssj6akshat
May 18th, 2010, 12:49 PM
Adobe porting to Linux is a joke.If the Million dollar earning Non-Profit Mozilla was not able to port Firefox to GTK,How do you expect Adobe a for profit company to port their products to GTK?

Meep3D
May 18th, 2010, 01:22 PM
I would love to see Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Illustrator, and Flash CS running well in wine, those are what I need for my work. Started my own web design company last month, thanks to ITT-tech I already have a client, though I'm not completely up and running site or otherwise, still trying figure out pricing in general. I mean I'm not even sure exactly how to be charging or what would be a good low rate to start with to attract customers...At moment I'm charging my client $25 per page for a basic website (To make)(w/o flash) and maybe $50 a month for maintenance. However not sure if I should keep it that low...but I digress.

Figure out how long it actually takes you to do the task, figure out how much you want to make per hour, add 30% as a buffer and then round as you see appropriate.

$25 for creation is far too low and $50 for hosting is far too high unless you are doing a lot of SEO.

MasterNetra
May 18th, 2010, 03:15 PM
Figure out how long it actually takes you to do the task, figure out how much you want to make per hour, add 30% as a buffer and then round as you see appropriate.

$25 for creation is far too low and $50 for hosting is far too high unless you are doing a lot of SEO.

No hosting, the client wants to stay with me for the long term and update his site with the appropriate information/images and in one case changing a cartoon episode preview on a weekly bases.

At $25 per page I'm only going to make $535 (He wanted me to do a page on a weekend which I did warn I charge extra for, this case going to be $35, still a crap low price but meh).

I have however, come a crossed: http://webdesign.about.com/cs/salaries/a/aapricing_2.htm

based on it, for basic 3 week project I should charge at least 1100, (for site creation)(I currently have modest expenses atm) Though I might charge between 1200-1300 for a buffer so I can later do discounts/promotions. Naturally the price will go up as I gather experience and more expenses. I am of course going by the price of the project rather then a hourly wage, After all I figure a client thats nervous about the final price throughout the whole thing has a better chance of not doing business again. And I do plan on charging extra for the extras that the client wants put in that wasn't part of the initial project, in the effort to control scope creep some.

murderslastcrow
May 20th, 2010, 03:14 AM
Are there any polls or petitions we could be submitting our vote on? Also, what department/email/phone number should we use to contact Adobe and express our support? I really wanna' see this happen before the day Wine has perfect compatibility.

Also, I don't think having them compile against Wine is a bad idea, since it makes the program more compatible with different versions of Windows for them, and they're not planning on supporting ARM or PowerPC anyway, and the only other platforms have Wine available- and soon 64-bit Wine at that.

So yeah, there are many options besides an entire port. However, I think if we got serious and really pushed for it, we might at least get one of the CS applications- we have Flex, after all, and Adobe makes Flash/AIR/Acrobat for Linux as well.

I would want at least to get an official statement on the probability.

Also, I think it would be interesting to put our money where our mouth is, literally, and start raising funds to promote it. Something kinda' like what Diaspora did officially on Kickstarter.

If Diaspora can make enough noise to raise over 140,000 dollars in less than a month, then how much would this raise? That would be something real, tangible, that Adobe could look at and see that it's worth it. Heck, maybe they would code against wxWidgets or something. XD

TL|DR, let me summarize. Any polls/petitions/campaigns in support of Adobe CS for Linux? Perhaps a fundraiser would be a good way to push hard and show Adobe our support.

Websufs
May 26th, 2010, 07:51 PM
I saw CS4 run on Michael Natkin's (http://herbivoracious.com/about.html) dev platform/workstation here in Seattle. He is actually pretty cool and I think, supports open source. These are the kind of folks Linux users need to talk to directly.

A Linux port exists, but there is a political economy that surrounds it and really Adobe doesn't care about much but the bottom line. When they mention that there isn't a user base, they are lying. The number one customer of Adobe Products is EDMC Education Management Corporation, which owns all of the Art Institutes in the US. That is where the bulk of their profits come from. Without EDMC they would take a substantial hit. EDMC specifically uses Windows and OS X because of deals with M$ and Apple. As far as other users , my guess is the defection to UbuntuLinux would be massive if these products were ported.

Talk to the developers and people working specifically on products.

The real bottom line for Adobe is that they are losing money big time. I know of about 12 artists who are now refusing to purchase Adobe Products and are using pirated versions in protest. These are folks who have always played by the rules and have licensed every piece of software, but are sick of paying MAC prices for older PC hardware, running OS's that need AV software firewall internet suites and UAC's. They want simple, responsive Operating systems that don't get in the way. Only Linux can do this.

Don't forget Photoshop used to be ported to Linux and Irix until version 3 and they were paid to stop producing it. They cited a decline in SGI sales, but really this wasn't the case. Maya has worked really well in Linux for sometime, as does Fusion and Shake.

I think maybe looking at Apple's recent hostility towards Adobe could make a whole new market for them.

Otherwise, I think you are going to see artists increasingly pirate Adobe products in protest.

I have purchased Maya for Linux every edition it has been available. It is worth it to me.
Do you know any good pirated versions of AdobeCs4 or Cs5 for Linux Kubuntu or Ubuntu 10.04? :-$

Madspyman
May 26th, 2010, 08:42 PM
Well what AmbientOcclusion said is a hell of a thing to make up then. Sounds like to me that you are just trying to cover your tracks Micheal.

Agreed, I have an odd feeling about a paid cover up and information leaks being dismissed as hearsay on the part of disgruntled Linux users.

No doubt that if Adobe Linux ports existed, it would hurt Apple's business relating to graphic design, and Microsoft's place on the PC.

PC manufactures could offer CS compatible machines using custom company branded versions of Linux. They'd be geared towards graphic designers. It'd take a chunk of cash out of Microsoft's Windows racket, and Apple wouldn't be able to compete with the PC price point.

If it was successful other major software developer might see the benefit in porting there software to Linux.

Adobe could cause a domino effect that could be bad for both Microsoft and Apple. I wouldn't doubt that Adobe was getting money from both of them to keep their graphic design software off Linux.

a sandwhich
August 31st, 2010, 01:24 AM
cs4, lightwave, and valve are the only things keeping me dual booting with vista. If there was not a driver problem with the physical key in lightwave I would just be running a virtual machine. It think someone should establish a small community devoted to developing open source gtk competitors to adobe and the like. bump

chris200x9
August 31st, 2010, 01:30 AM
besides a lot of people pirate photoshop anyway, but they can't pirate computers.

you wouldn't download a car!!!

a sandwhich
August 31st, 2010, 01:58 AM
I would if i could

a sandwhich
August 31st, 2010, 02:11 AM
holy crud 600 tb!!!!1!

lol

trusktr
September 2nd, 2010, 09:39 AM
I found a wine tutorial for Photoshop CS5 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3XM5Q-G8Pw) on youtube. I hope this works for after effects.

patrikh20
September 29th, 2010, 06:28 PM
found this http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/idiots-guide-installing-photoshop-cs5-ubuntu-1004/

gunit888
December 6th, 2010, 04:03 PM
I found this a few days ago:
http://int3ractive.blogspot.com/2010/08/how-to-run-flash-cs5-on-ubuntu-with.html

Apparently, if you copy the files from a Windows install, you can run Flash Professional CS5 on Wine 1.3.8 very well. Though, it does require you to install it on Windows first, it's at least something. I'm going to give it a try myself today, I'll report back on how well it went.

perspectoff
December 31st, 2010, 05:14 PM
I kind of agree with the post: if you can afford Adobe, you can afford an extra license for a Virtual Machine copy of Mac OS X or Windows.

My sister, a bit limited in the software wisdom department, actually bought a Mac just to use Adobe products. Cost her over $2000.

When I showed her Gimp, she said "it can't do what I do in Adobe." Of course, she had never read the Gimp instructions and had succumbed to FUD and Adobe marketing.

When I showed her, within about 20 minutes, how to do everything in Gimp she does in Adobe, and showed her all the plugins for Gimp that are available to do the "extra" stuff, she had Gimp running on her Mac. Turns out she had wanted to do something she couldn't even figure out how to do in Adobe, and for which there was a plugin for Gimp. I laughed myself silly and asked her next time just to send me the $2000 first, before buying expensive hardware in order to run expensive software.

Bottom line: RTFM.

MB0SS
January 1st, 2011, 04:46 AM
How to install Adobe Photoshop CS5 on Ubuntu 10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZnCcJuQLwY

MisterGaribaldi
January 1st, 2011, 07:33 AM
While I like what this dude Bryan is saying and I respect what he's trying to accomplish, I think there are some real serious challenges here that make this all rather unlikely at best.

First, Bryan is right in pointing out that for big-time developers to come to any particular OS platform, there has to be money in it for them. Now, I don't know whether I should take Ubuntu Forums and Fedora Forums and all the rest serious or only with a grain of sand, but if the whole of the actual Linux community is reflected by these groups, then I don't see people stumping up the money to make it worth it for Adobe, et al, to even think about it. The fact that Adobe decided to do a port of Flash, Adobe Reader, etc., to Linux is pretty huge, actually, but there are other reasons for doing this that don't directly have to do with "us as Linux users" paying them anything. But we sure do know how to b*tch about all this software we've gotten for free from them, don't we?

Besides, all the predictions are that the true future growth of the Linux user base is going to be from largely third-world sources, some second-world sources, and the rest is going to be made up of what... hobbyist users like us? That's not what I'd call a very good source for significant stable income. One can try to make the argument that Adobe, et al, will do it out of self-defense because Linux will grow into too huge a market to ignore, or that there's going to be this threat of some "competitor from underneath" and so they'll have to do what they have to do to simply keep their status and position.

Linux has now been around for what, 20-odd years? It's had some of the brightest minds working on it or otherwise associated with it, it is found in numbers of different research and educational institutions, and has major companies helping to pump money into it, and yet we still haven't one single serious competitor to a desktop commercial software product? (I'll make Firefox the exception, but only partially because neither Microsoft nor Apple "sell" their browser products.)

No, the best chance we have is to donate money to existing and future projects for home-grown drop-in replacement software, and even then that's a dicey proposition for a couple reasons. The first (and principle) one is money. Remember, most people I've seen on Linux aren't keen to go giving significant sums of money to software makers (with the exception of games), and without a significant and stable revenue stream, 501c3 organizations (and their like around the world) don't last very long. The second thing is software patents and copyrights, both of which for a host of reasons interfere with developing a LOT of this software, either due to patent squatters or the fact that a LOT of the software we're interested in relies on codecs which cost a LOT of money to license, cannot be gotten around (if you want to produce software who's product is broadly compatible and data interchangeable with others using compatible commercial software on other platforms) and is likely to make the OSS community a bit squeamish because of the proliferation of NDAs, etc., that will surely accompany them.

So, you know, good luck and all that, but these aren't issues easy to solve under the best of circumstances.

AmbientOcclusion
June 29th, 2012, 10:02 PM
MG: Well that sounds like a cop out. Linux has seriously competed with desktop products in most categories.

But the argument is about Adobe products, which are highly used and closed source.

Now CS6 is a cloud based with heavy html5 integration, so even less of an argument to keep it from the linux platform.

Now that Michael Natkin has left Adobe after being an After Effects engineer for such a long time, maybe he can be persuaded to spill the beans on Adobe's hatred of open source?

michael [at] herbivoracious.com

He seems to be a good guy, so what he knows about Adobe could be helpful to the open source community at large. Maybe he could help in the development of an After Effects style program for Linux?

Anyone have persuasive arguments they could send his way? Having an After Effects engineer from Adobe work on an open source Linux compositing program would be great... Right?

frup
June 30th, 2012, 05:20 AM
Linux has now been around for what, 20-odd years? It's had some of the brightest minds working on it or otherwise associated with it, it is found in numbers of different research and educational institutions, and has major companies helping to pump money into it, and yet we still haven't one single serious competitor to a desktop commercial software product? (I'll make Firefox the exception, but only partially because neither Microsoft nor Apple "sell" their browser products.)


Linux can compete on servers because it does pretty much everything that's needed of a server.

It can't compete on the desktop because it doesn't have many of the tools people want. In relation to Adobe, it is the dominant player in the design industry. Its closed file formats are "industry standard". If you're going to use Adobe products you're not going to use linux as it stands.

The argument I guess is IF Adobe chose to release their software for Linux, many of those companies paying massive amounts for adobe would then say, well why the hell should we pay for windows etc. and everything else linux can do when that's not what is important to our business.

What is interesting about the design industry is that people such as Architects, Product Designers, Graphic Designers etc. etc. are generally reasonably intelligent. They learn how to use complicated applications and wouldn't necessarily find linux difficult. It just isn't practical for them to use.

Maybe GIMP will have a reputation similar to Blender one day. Who knows.

What would be interesting is if more collaboration occurred between the people who create FOSS apps, from GIMP, Blender, Krita, Libre Office, Koffice etc. etc. Personally I think the resources are there to improve at a faster rate.

But as I see it, that's not going to happen.

ubudog
June 30th, 2012, 07:03 AM
Old thread closed.