Petition: Programs Adobe for Linux.

[viniciusbenevidesf]

Hi, everyone. My name is Vinicius I am Brazilian, I am also new to the forum. I am passionate about ubuntu 3 years ago, and I really believe that operating system. I am designer and unfortunately never adapted myself to the Gimp. I had the idea of ​​creating a petition so try and draw attention from Adobe. Not sure if this will serve something, but I come here to ask if you need as much as I, to sign the petition.

https://secure.avaaz.org/po/petition...ara_Linux/edit

Sorry for the bad english. If you want to send me suggestions for new descriptions for the petition, it would be great!

[cariboo]

This has been tried several times before, and nothing has come of it.If you want to try again, than more power to you.

[viniciusbenevidesf]

I know this may not help ... But you could sign?

[monkeybrain20122]

Not going to happen. Adobe doesn't care. Leaving aside the number argument why should adobe give a darn as long as Linux users continue to dual boot and use wine to use their products? They are still getting your $$$.In some perverse way maybe the harder you beg and the more desperate you appear the more they will ignore you because it shows that you cannot do without their product and would continue to pay for it in one way or the other (maybe returning to Windows or Mac or dualbooting, or VM) That is how I would think if I were Adobe's CEO.

I think you will have better luck petitioning Gimp to implement the features you want. Support Libre software!


(Aside: the number argument is not valid IMO. It depends on how many people in a certain niche market use a certain product, not the overall user base. For examples, scientific software is very well supported in Linux, in fact better than other platforms in many ways because Linux users are well represented in the research community despite the overall small user base. In the same way there is a very high concentration of artistic types on Mac even though its overall user base is much smaller than Windows, hence creative software is better supported in Mac than even Windows)

[buzzingrobot]

Adobe would make a decision about creating a line of Linux products the same way they would make a decision about creating *any* new product: They'd weigh the cost of creating, marketing, and supporting each potential new product against the expected return, and then compare that to the expected return from putting the same money into something else. So, just the fact that Adobe might sell Linux products to some people is, by itself, not sufficient reason to create that product line.

[mayagrafix]

Just out of curiosity: if MacOSX is a Unix derivate, as is Linux, therefore, if already there are Adobe software versions for MacOS, isn't it just a small step to port said software to Linux?

[lykwydchykyn]

Just out of curiosity: if MacOSX is a Unix derivate, as is Linux, therefore, if already there are Adobe software versions for MacOS, isn't it just a small step to port said software to Linux?

Not necessarily. Depends how it was written; the native toolkits and desktop frameworks used on OSX are proprietary and not ported to Linux, so if they wrote to those libraries porting would be a huge deal. If they wrote to something like Qt or another cross-platform framework, it wouldn't be as big a deal -- but because of the tookit/framework, not because of the Unix underpinnings.

But porting the code is only part of the battle. Once you port a product, you have to market the product, support the product, maintain the product. That's where the real costs lie.

[buzzingrobot]

Not necessarily. Depends how it was written; the native toolkits and desktop frameworks used on OSX are proprietary and not ported to Linux, so if they wrote to those libraries porting would be a huge deal. If they wrote to something like Qt or another cross-platform framework, it wouldn't be as big a deal -- but because of the tookit/framework, not because of the Unix underpinnings.

But porting the code is only part of the battle. Once you port a product, you have to market the product, support the product, maintain the product. That's where the real costs lie.

Plus, Steve Jobs rather frequently and vociferously expressed his strong distaste for Flash and did his best to keep it away from Apple products.

Plus plus... the proliferation of Linux distributions, combined with its tiny market share, discourage porting of commercial code. Even if the differences between distributions turn out to be insignificant, they need to be tested against before a product can be released for each, and changes in each individual distribution need to be tracked over time if, for no other reason, just to verify that the product works on that distribution. That adds up to extra cost and hassle. Vendors have typically decided to spend that money on boosting sales of their Windows/Apple products.

And, most vendors seem to believe that it's the no-cost definition of "free" that attracts most users to Linux. We have a reputation for not being prepared to buy software.

[t0p]

Plus, Steve Jobs rather frequently and vociferously expressed his strong distaste for Flash and did his best to keep it away from Apple products.

I'm confused. Does Apple own Adobe? And is it relevant what Jobs did or didn't like? It's more than 2 years now since he passed on.

And, most vendors seem to believe that it's the no-cost definition of "free" that attracts most users to Linux. We have a reputation for not being prepared to buy software.

It's a pity the English language doesn't have different terms like, for instance, French (libre/gratis).

[buzzingrobot]

No, Apple does not own Adobe. (Altho the wish is sometimes expressed.) But, Apple is one of the forces promoting Flash alternatives.

Adobe did port Flash to Linux. Probably didn't make them a dime.

(Different vocabulary wouldn't alter behavior. There's truth in the perception that Linux users are a terrible market.)