Adobe kills and moves CS and Photoshop to the cloud, Will we see it for linux?

[madjr]

http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/photo-1.jpg?w=1024&h=768

More info:

http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2013/05/photoshop-cc-for-creative-cloud-members-coming-soon.html

FAQ or ask a Question:
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2013/05/answering-your-questions-about-photoshop-cc.html

[evilsoup]

As far as I can tell, they're just switching to digital distribution (and using the 'cloud' buzzword, and getting more control over what their customers can do), so this won't affect porting it to Linux.

[Buntu Bunny]

Well, the comments to the article don't make it sound too promising.

[buzzingrobot]

Adobe products ported to Linux *and* only available for annual or monthly subscription fees?

Never.

[SeijiSensei]

I guess the rampant piracy of Photoshop has started to catch up with Adobe.

At one time, I'm pretty sure Adobe ignored piracy of PS for good business reasons. Its principal market for these products is professional designers and studios who play full price. Piracy enabled prospective young graphics designers to become adept at using Adobe products. When they later became employed, they expected to find licensed copies of these products on their desktops. In part, the continuity of Photoshop's dominance came from its widespread piracy. Maybe that model is not doing so well these days?

[iamkuriouspurpleoranj]

^Isn't that Red Hat's business model with Fedora?

[monkeybrain2012]

At one time, I'm pretty sure Adobe ignored piracy of PS for good business reasons. Its principal market for these products is professional designers and studios who play full price. Piracy enabled prospective young graphics designers to become adept at using Adobe products. When they later became employed, they expected to find licensed copies of these products on their desktops. In part, the continuity of Photoshop's dominance came from its widespread piracy. Maybe that model is not doing so well these days?

Well people will still be pirating the old versions because of brand recognition if nothing else, and since I assume CS7 will be similar to the older versions apart from the platform and mode of paying that would still have the effect of locking them to PS. Reading the comments a few angry long time PS users said they were moving to GIMP. This would be good news if more follow suit.

[buzzingrobot]

^Isn't that Red Hat's business model with Fedora?

No.

Red Hat sells support for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, on a subscription basis, as is common in that arena. Red Hat does not sell Red Hat Enterprise Linux. RHEL source is on Red Hat's servers for anyone who wants it. CentOS and Scientific Linux are the two primary examples of Linux releases that are essentially recompilations of RHEL.

Fedora is a Linux distribution sponsored by Red Hat. From their perspective, it is a proving ground for new technology that may or may not someday be rolled into RHEL. Fedora is cutting edge. RHEL just the opposite.

Both Red Hat and the Fedora project are strong and ardent FOSS advocates and participants, and have been for years.

[azangru]

since I assume CS7 will be similar to the older versions...

There will be no CS7. There will be the first CC instead :)

[iamkuriouspurpleoranj]

I meant more with regard to winning hearts and minds. The idea being that their goal is to motivate people to become Fedora users who will contribute to the project (more technical than average) and maybe get interested in spending money on lucrative Red Hat certification. All of which will reduce the market price of RHEL/CentOS sysadmins in the long run and encourage the adoption of RHEL in businesses.

[Linuxratty]

As far as I can tell, they're just switching to digital distribution (and using the 'cloud' buzzword, and getting more control over what their customers can do), so this won't affect porting it to Linux.

I've used the Gimp for nine years so I have no interest in Photoshop. Thar being said,I really do not 100 percent trust cloud services anyway.

[mastablasta]

I've used the Gimp for nine years so I have no interest in Photoshop. Thar being said,I really do not 100 percent trust cloud services anyway.
i've read quite a few articles and FAQ cause i was interested in what they are actually doing. reporting on this. was strange in some articles.

Cloud is there mostly only to strengthen DRM. a buzzword. obviously this has nothing to do with cloud computing. their storage is limited to certain files only anyway.

GIMP is good enough for me as well.

Then again i imagine for some professional Photoshop is a better choice. many things in GIMP are quirky and akward. They are just done faster and easier in photoshop. while some advanced PS features are missing alltogether. but again GIMP is good enough for me. i use it on windows maschines as well. i can buy two computers for the price of photoshop.
let's not go into tabets. their price doesn't make sense to me. probably cause i do not need it.

[buzzingrobot]

... i imagine for some professional Photoshop is a better choice


Gimp has improved a great deal over the years, but Photoshop is such an accepted standard in the photo/prepress/design business that I don't believe we will ever see widespread adoption of Gimp in that community.

The cost of Photoshop is less of a concern for businesses and actual pros than it might seem. For people who sink tens of thousand of dollars, and more, in hardware, office space, training, and staff, Photoshop is just another business cost.

[mastablasta]

that's right. if you have a lot of profit (high margins, usually services with low material costs e.g. ad agency...) additional cost will help you get tax deductions (at least here).

anyway i am not really a graphics designer. in fact most things turn messy when i try to draw them. however i read compliants from pros abotu gimp. such as for example certain functions (certian resize) that are done by drag&drop in PS need a couple of menu clicks in gimp and possible manual input. i believe there are possible more of such functions that are included in GIMP but done in inneficient way. then you have things such as autofil and such that i believe are nto present in GIMP. but for normal occasioanl users GIMP is more than just fine. which is why we have it on all computers. for editing an image or remove background and such GIMP is good enough.

[forrestcupp]

Gimp has improved a great deal over the years, but Photoshop is such an accepted standard in the photo/prepress/design business that I don't believe we will ever see widespread adoption of Gimp in that community.

The cost of Photoshop is less of a concern for businesses and actual pros than it might seem. For people who sink tens of thousand of dollars, and more, in hardware, office space, training, and staff, Photoshop is just another business cost.
True. But some people think they have to have Photoshop just to create their memes. I'll bet Photoshop is overkill for a lot of the people using it.

[buzzingrobot]

True. But some people think they have to have Photoshop just to create their memes. I'll bet Photoshop is overkill for a lot of the people using it.


Memes? Can you sell a meme?

Given the apparent rate of Photoshop thievery, I'm sure it is overkill for many people who have it installed. Most of them probably think Photoshop is just a photo editor.

For professional use -- meaning the tool that enhances profits takes precedence over personal preference -- Photoshop wins. If clients and customers are going to send you PSD files, you'd better have Photoshop handy and know how to use it.

Gimp is fine. But there is an entire universe of Photoshop tools, plugins, and expectations out there. Anyone interested in making money would be foolish to ignore that.

[forrestcupp]

Memes? Can you sell a meme?

Given the apparent rate of Photoshop thievery, I'm sure it is overkill for many people who have it installed. Most of them probably think Photoshop is just a photo editor.

For professional use -- meaning the tool that enhances profits takes precedence over personal preference -- Photoshop wins. If clients and customers are going to send you PSD files, you'd better have Photoshop handy and know how to use it.

Gimp is fine. But there is an entire universe of Photoshop tools, plugins, and expectations out there. Anyone interested in making money would be foolish to ignore that.
I agree. For a professional it's a necessity. I was just talking about all of the non-professionals who don't really need it, but they think they need it.

[pfeiffep]

I agree. For a professional it's a necessity. I was just talking about all of the non-professionals who don't really need it, but they think they need it.

I've never owned any version of Photo Shop, however I am a long time (paid) Photo Shop Elements user. Many times I refer to my digital editing and the tool used as Photo Shop because it's an accepted and understood term.

I only learned about GIMP when I ventured into the Linux world. I tried to use GIMP and early on decided that I wasn't ready to adopt it due to, IMHO, a very steep learning curve since I've been using Elements since version 5 and now on 11. Since I already own Windows 7 and PSE 11 I'll keep a dual boot scenario until such time as I'm fully comfortable with Linux and willing to spend the time adopting GIMP.

[mastablasta]

Aside from Gimp, Krita should also do it for most users... Still on it's start but getting better and better each release.

[buzzingrobot]

... I am a long time (paid) Photo Shop Elements user. Many times I refer to my digital editing and the tool used as Photo Shop because it's an accepted and understood term.

I only learned about GIMP when I ventured into the Linux world. I tried to use GIMP and early on decided that I wasn't ready to adopt it due to, IMHO, a very steep learning curve since I've been using Elements since version 5 and now on 11.

I've used several releases of Elements. It's great for photo-editing tasks. The reason both GIMP and Photoshop are so much larger and complex is that they include much more than photo editing capability. If you only need to process photos, you don't need those capabilities.

Eventually, I moved to Lightroom on OS X, which has all the photo editing function I need plus organizing, managing, and locating images (which is a serious issue once you accumulate more than a handful of images.) One of these days, I may tackle the job of migrating everything to Linux. But, for now, they live on a MacBook.

OS X users ought to look at another very good photo editing tool: Acorn.