Adobe Photoshop ships on Macs with Apple Silicon

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2021/03/10/adobe-photoshop-ships-on-macs-with-apple-silicon-gains-speedier-selections-filters-and-performance-boosts.html#gs.vxmvhg

by jbverschoor • 5 years ago

283 287 5 years ago

blog.adobe.com

keyle2• 5 years ago

For how long?

Every new generation of computer has been "woooo look how fast photoshop starts cold now! And Illustrator, so fast!"

... 6 months later <waaaaat is it doing?!>

thejohnconway• 5 years ago

I swear Illustrator takes longer to launch now from a fast SSD than it did from a slow laptop HDD 15 years ago. Input latency is awful. Something's gone crazily wrong with the bloat in Adobe applications.

I would jump on an optimised version of Illustrator with the feature set from 10 (or more) years ago.

martin_a• 5 years ago

I feel this every time I start up my old Adobe CS4 on my private (somewhat older) Thinkpad. While the work notebook (Dell Latitude whatever) is faster than the Thinkpad, the current Adobe CC surely takes longer so start than the CS4.

Ellipsis753• 5 years ago

I would jump on an optimised version of Illustrator with the feature set from 10 (or more) years ago.

Genuine question, can't you just install an old version of Illustrator?

vimy• 5 years ago

I would jump on an optimised version of Illustrator with the feature set from 10 (or more) years ago.

The iPad version?

pentae• 5 years ago

Figma? Sketch?

Doctor_Fegg2• 5 years ago

This. I'm keeping a Mac mini on Mojave specifically to run Illustrator CS6. The price of an Intel Mac mini on eBay is fairly competitive with 2 years of Illustrator CC payments.

dbspin• 5 years ago

Buy a USB cd ROM drive (around 30 dollars / euro), buy an old copy of illustrator, say 5 or 6. Use offline activation using the included code.

dunnevens• 5 years ago

I bought Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign CS2 a long time ago. Still use it since it's mostly for hobby and very occasional freelance. There's a tiny bit of jank running it on Windows 10, but otherwise it starts quickly and runs perfectly. The only thing I'd change if I could is to have a 64 bit version. This one chokes occasionally on very large files. But I don't deal with those enough to invest in the subscription.

user-the-name• 5 years ago

Affinity Designer?

kitsunesoba• 5 years ago

Yeah I know it varies from person to person but for me the addition of useful features I use with any regularity stopped at like… CS2. And if I’m being honest, I’d have no issue getting along with CS1 or even pre-CS 6.x/7.x.

coldtea• 5 years ago

Hasn't been my experience. Photoshop, for all its clunky UI decisions (at some point it had Flash-driven panels too e.g.), has always been very fast, and fastest than the competition in large image processing.

amelius3• 5 years ago

Exactly. In the 90s PCs jumped from a few 100MHz to 3GHz in a few years. Now that was impressive. This on the other hand is just plain old evolution of technology.

phaemon2• 5 years ago

I'm afraid you're remembering incorrectly. The Pentium 100Mhz was released in 1994. The last Pentium released in 1999 was the PIII 800Mhz. There wasn't a 3GHz release until 2010.

And that's just clock speed. Compare any 2010 chip to something like a Ryzen 5800x and see how the benchmarks scores look.

mhh__• 5 years ago

I also wonder whether a lot of M1 Anecdata is biased because it's a new computer at the end of the day

Eric_WVGG• 5 years ago

I suppose that would depend on how many of those machines were set up with Migration Assistant, which transfers nearly all the cruft from an old machine, all the way down to Homebrew packages and other CLI tools. Doesn’t really feel like a “new computer” when you’re greeted with the same desktop and console.

My anecdata last weekend was 60% to 90% JavaScript benchmarks from a loaded 15” to an M1 Air, that coupled with no fans screaming at me sure felt new.

tinus_hn• 5 years ago

  What Andy giveth, Bill taketh away

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law

rhacker• 5 years ago

I know it's a different thing, but my SSD based systems (at this point it's all of my systems) still boot in ~10 seconds.

matthewmacleod• 5 years ago

Generally I dislike this kind of view and find it not to be true.

But in this case… man, it feels like Adobe deliberately try to slow down Photoshop and the wider CS suite. I used to use these a lot back in early CS days, but I've used the trials recently and by far the biggest offenders are some of the bad UIs that they've slapped on top of things like creating new documents, or Photoshop's "Home Screen".

They're slow as molasses, provide minimal useful features, and there is an explicit option to turn them off and use the legacy versions (usually a massive red flag to me that a feature is shite).

ceejayoz• 5 years ago

there is an explicit option to turn them off and use the legacy versions

I had no idea this existed. THANK YOU!

AuryGlenz• 5 years ago

They changed their rendering engine for Photoshop a couple of years back and ever since it’s been slow as hell. I’m in Photoshop at least 20 hours a week and I’m still using Photoshop 2019.

keyle2• 5 years ago

Man it's that bad I've literally stopped my Adobe subscription and moved on to Affinity products. It's 95% as good. (Better than how you'd compare DDG to Google for example). And so much cheaper. Also Adobe has so much crapware on my computer.

jp555• 5 years ago

I heard Jim Keller say on a podcast recently that many computation problems are N^2, so if unoptimized and run on silicon with 2x the transistors, it runs 4x slower.

crazygringo• 5 years ago

Fifteen years ago Photoshop took 2-3 minutes to load on an average computer.

These days it takes 8-15 seconds on a non-M1.

Filters that used to take 50 seconds to run now finish in just a couple.

The point you're making is true with some software. But not Photoshop.

1f60c2• 5 years ago

  // TODO: Uncomment after keynote demo
  // Thread.Sleep(5000);

Shadonototro• 5 years ago

ah the microsoft people, they are easy to spot :p

beyondcompute• 5 years ago

Does it feel like it took surprisingly long to port it?

thinxer• 5 years ago

I expect Photoshop to contain many highly optimized function routines for photo processing. These routines are optimized by hand and usually use architecture-specific features such as SSE/AVX which is not portable.

Unoptimized (more portable) versions of theses routines exists, but I suspect they will perform well even with M1.

unicornfinder• 5 years ago

Indeed. It's why Photoshop for Mac won't run an Ryzen systems - it's optimised to the point where it relies on specific Intel CPU instructions.

rowanG077• 5 years ago

This is probably true. But afaik photoshop allready ran on ios. So I would have expected it to take a couple of weeks at most.

mirsadm• 5 years ago

I'd expect them to have moved on from hand assembly to things like halide-lang.org/ by now.

Const-me• 5 years ago

architecture-specific features such as SSE/AVX which is not portable.

I don’t have hands-on experience, but somewhere on HN I saw this: https://github.com/simd-everywhere/simde If starting a new cross-platform project today, I would try that library first, before doing the usual intrinsics.

tuyiown2• 5 years ago

I'd imagine that they would have been cautious with highly cpu tuned instruction flow after the PPC->intel migration.

whywhywhywhy3• 5 years ago

I expect Photoshop to contain many highly optimized function routines

Ah, I see you have never had the pleasure of using it.

Sarcasm aside, the whole Adobe suite makes atrocious use of your machines actual power, most is still single core. My machine can simulate the entire virtualized interactions of simulated light photons on glass on multiple GPUs in the time it takes photoshop to encode a GIF.

and you think "well maybe encoding the gif is more work?" yet try any GIF encoder written in pure Javascript and they still outperform Photoshop and also the 3D render.

brailsafe• 5 years ago

Not at all. I'm surprised they got it done so fast. They're previous big product updates in response to Apple hardware releases have taken way longer.

ChrisLTD• 5 years ago

I’d have to imagine some of the work they’ve done to make iOS apps, and the work they started to make a Windows on ARM version of Photoshop helped a bit.

shp0ngle• 5 years ago

Not really. I would expect a lot of number-crunching stuff, that's not easily portable.

For example, SciPy/NumPy/R is not ported to M1 for similar reason.

Well, just similar, they depend on FORTRAN of all things, and that does not have M1 compiler. Maybe Photoshop stuff does too?

mrtranscendence• 5 years ago

Scipy, Numpy, and R all work on an M1 Mac if compiled to do so.

tuyiown2• 5 years ago

Nope, they've been kicking and screaming a verrry long time for the PPC -> intel migration, with a lot of people legitimating it due to hand optimized PPC code

hadrien01• 5 years ago

Our internal tests show a wide range of features running an average of 1.5X the speed of similarly configured previous generation systems.

What are 'similarly configured previous generation systems'? Do they mean i5, i7, i9? What GPU?

addedlovely2• 5 years ago

Sure it won't take long for them to add more bloat and slow it down.

Wish I could cancel my creative cloud subscription but there is still prevalent use. Sketch and Figma do a much nicer job of things. Seems Adobe end up copying some of their features but always buried a few more clicks deep.

BurnerBotje• 5 years ago

I've just canceled my subscription this morning after i've received a reminder that it would be renewed.

I don't know where you use CC for, but if it is just for photoshop, you might give https://www.photopea.com/ a try.

laurent123456• 5 years ago

I switched to Affinity Photo as an alternative [1] and quite happy with it. It's similar enough to Photoshop that I'm not lost, more polished than Gimp, and only a fraction of the price. Their forum is also quite good for support.

1: https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/photo/

bsaul• 5 years ago

Thanks for that link. I've often found myself wanting to do minimal image work, and this is the first time i see something really usable.

JohnJamesRambo• 5 years ago

Thank you, we want to try this. I despise subscription model software. I wish I could find my Adobe Photoshop 6.0 disk, it did everything I need just fine.

vishnugupta• 5 years ago

PSA: Be aware of Adobe's "Yearly contract billed monthly" subscription thingy.

boraoztunc• 5 years ago

This is really something I've been thinking for quite some time, canceling my CC subscription (which is monthly) but there are couple of things that kept from executing this decision; first of course loong years of habit (almost 20), hard to leave. After switching to Figma for UI design, my main use of CC for branding, print design is left to Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and photography editing for Lightroom. I can ditch the others in CC apps in an instant, but I can't Photoshop and Illustrator, because the branding design works need mockups, brushes, textures, stuff and web resources mostly made for PS, also I've a huge offline archive I like using, also there is print work, which I use Illustrator mainly. Adobe products really make me mad, they work in weird ways, crash, lost work and data, plus couple of times in a year something happens to make me connect to client support, these are the times that I really want to cut my all connection with the company and their products.

At some point I'll manage to figure this out and take a bold step further to leave Adobe all behind. I know there are options, tried most of them (Affinity etc), but I make my living through these apps and I need reliable software with resources and community, just like Figma did in a great way for UX/product design, I wish they create side products like CC apps, for print design, even audio design, that would be awesome.

daniellarusso2• 5 years ago

I have been happy with Pixelmator Pro.

I use it for work.

One time fee, I can’t justify Photoshop CC for once per quarter usage.

I may use it intensively for a few days then not touch it for months.

kuon• 5 years ago

I have many customers who are stuck with CC for Acrobat. It seems to be the only full featured PDF editing program.

instafail• 5 years ago

I cancelled my subscription a few days ago. It was the most painfull procedure ever. Help article points to a cancellation button, which does not exist. Contact page leads to nowhere. Chat bot points you to the useless help section. Finally a real human behind the chatbot answers, but takes extra long time to make you lose any remaining patience or hope. Finally after 1 hour of various counter offers and discounts, they accept the cancellation request. I have never witnessed a subscription cancellation process this obstructive. It should be illegal.

nkozyra• 5 years ago

I just tried this and while I appreciate the attempt to make it relatively the same UI as Photoshop most of the things I tried didn't work like they would in Photoshop.

I couldn't apply a filter to a shape layer, which I can do in Photoshop. It didn't blur out the option, I had to click it to find out I couldn't do it.

I did try to gaussian blur a layer and it did nothing until I hit 50px then at 51px it basically blurred everything out of existence. I tried this in Photoshop and it behaved in a more linear way, as I'd expect.

This would actually be less of a problem if every Photoshop alternative didn't try to be a pixel perfect clone of Photoshop. Take some risks, evaluate some choices and see if you can do things better than Photoshop. Otherwise the comparisons will be too stark.

I understand a lot of the vitriol towards Adobe for a number of reasons, but for some reason they just do photo/image editing better than anyone else. I keep waiting for the day a FOSS alternative pops up that actually competes.

Toutouxc• 5 years ago

Have you checked out the Affinity offerings?

hypertexthero• 5 years ago

FYI Affinity Designer and Affinity Photo are good alternatives that also run on Apple Silicon.

They have no subscription requirements and are 50% off right now ($25 each): https://affinity.serif.com/

aetherspawn• 5 years ago

Affinity wouldn't let me switch my 3 month old Affinity Designer for OS X license with a Windows license when my laptop got stolen. They wanted me to pay $70 for another license, and their support was quite rude about it. The reason they gave me was "it would be unfair to the other customers that paid full price for both platforms".

I have a bad taste in my mouth about the ordeal and have been boycotting their software in protest. Because of how rude their support was, I would rather pay Adobe than spend a single dollar more at Affinity.

jscheel• 5 years ago

I love (and own) all the Affinity products, but Designer still has a long way to go to get to feature parity with Illustrator, imho. Good news is, they are always improving.

tecleandor• 5 years ago

Does anyone how well it holds (or if it's useful at all) against Lightroom?

I'm tired of the Adobe subscription ...

addedlovely2• 5 years ago

Thanks, will check it out. Reads like it'll handle opening InDesign, Illustrator and PSD's - assume that's workable and doesn't have too many gotchas?

I get a variety of artwork from designers in a plethora of formats and sadly can't enforce my preferences on them.

wildrhythms• 5 years ago

I've started using Pixelmator Pro, and I've been impressed so far. Much faster, snappier, and things like filters and color correction adjustments better designed, and without the bloat and cruft that comes with Photoshop.

cactus10• 5 years ago

50% Faster (according to Adobe, who want to sell new copies).

ErneX• 5 years ago

They sell subscriptions only now.

chrisseaton• 5 years ago

But Adobe don't sell copies - it's a subscription that works on whatever platform and they gain nothing from people switching architecture.

So what are you on about?

ksec2• 5 years ago

Here [1] is an actual test and benchmarks. Showing M1 is faster than a Laptop with Nvidia Discrete GPU.

Quite amazing.

[1] https://petapixel.com/2021/03/10/real-world-test-photoshop-f...

arghwhat• 5 years ago

They write that any GPU workload scores similar to the intel internal graphic[1].

For the total scores, they're intentionally using an old beta of the benchmark as it includes an older CPU workload that the M1 happens to excel at.

Seems a little like they're cherry picking results. Interesting, but a little dishonest.

----

[1]: Quoting the article:

Unsurprisingly, the M1 Mac mini loses to the competition in raw GPU performance, more-or-less matching the onboard graphics of the quad-core Core i7 that’s in the 13-inch MacBook Pro (full review here).

danlugo924• 5 years ago

Fact check: even if the M1's gpu performance matches that of an i7 as opposed to a discrete gpu it:

1) Is an entry level chip matching a high-end's performance.

2) it does so in around a 5th of 6th of the thermal workload.

okamiueru• 5 years ago

I don't understand what is behind the "filter" benchmarks, and it smells a bit fishy. Image filtering are (should be) highly GPU intensive tasks, so what does it mean to score low on "GPU" but somehow high on "filtering".

agloeregrets• 5 years ago

Results are a little strange. Theoretically speaking, the M1 is a 2.6 TFlop GPU at FP32. The Macbook Pro they are benching it with is just 1 TFlop. to get the exact same result on a GPU with 2.6X the FP perfromance seems....unusual. I would be interested to see if their benchmark is a limiting factor here as realword is dramatically different.

ribit• 5 years ago

I think this is more a testament to the quality of Adobe's GPU pipeline (or lack thereof). M1's GPU is surprisingly capable for a 10W part, and more importantly, it supports low-latency CPU/GPU communication and opt-in memory page sharing. The later is especially interesting for creative software, as CPU and GPU can work on the same data structure, eliminating the need for copies or GPU buffer management. Knowing Adobe however, it's probably most likely that they are still using OpenCL, so the lack of performance is not surprising.

P.S. Or maybe the GPU test is simply memory bandwidth limited...

ksec2• 5 years ago

The workload on Photoshop should be a mix of CPU with GPU acceleration. And possibly NPU with M1.

So the reference to GPU was even with a discrete GPU doing whatever acceleration Adobe has done for Nvidia, the M1 is still faster. And doing so with a Power Usage that is far less than its competitor. Of course if we only focus on "GPU" category than the results as listed is quite clear.

Which leads me to believe the NPU and CPU may have played a big part of it.

izacus2• 5 years ago

None of those laptops has a modern Ryzen CPU in them though? For a more fair comparison?

Also your post is a bit misleading: GPU performance is comparable to Intels, not nVidias which is explicitly called out.

unix_fan2• 5 years ago

Ryzen isn’t popular in the high end laptop class.

sbarre4• 5 years ago

So do this just mean that the legacy CPU architectures we've been working with for decades are just really outdated?

Is this less about M1 being amazing and more about Intel being inefficient, in terms of utilization of power/speed/features?

Because I have to assume the M1 chip can ignore a host of legacy compatibility/performance tradeoffs that must exist in x86 architecture.

If this is the result, hopefully it means a more generalized leap forward (not just for Apple hardware) at some point in the coming decade..

akmittal• 5 years ago

Not as slow as earlier is more relevant title

hahahahe• 5 years ago

Can’t wait for Mac Pro.

matsemann• 5 years ago

Is it faster on the M1 chip because they made a proper build for it compared to before on the M1 chip, or are they saying it's 50% faster on M1 than on other hardware? Edit: Title is now edited from what it was, it included a statement about speedup I couldn't find explained the same in the post

It contains this quote though

Our internal tests show a wide range of features running an average of 1.5X the speed of similarly configured previous generation systems.

So I guess it's faster than on other systems, but still vague about compared to what.

adioe3• 5 years ago

but they still can't make a version for Linux :'-(

jordache5• 5 years ago

What business case would they have to do such a thing?

amelius3• 5 years ago

Keeping FOSS from building a serious competitor.

shortstuffsushi• 5 years ago

Did anyone else read this as "Adobe Photoshop comes preloaded on Macs with Apple Silicon?" If I recall correctly, this was the case 15 (?) years back, I thought perhaps as a marketing gimmick, they were trying it again. Seems it would be a benefit to both of them - Apple can sell more hardware and Adobe can try to drive more people to purchase subscriptions with their app preloaded.

sergeykish• 5 years ago

I've red as "Adobe Photoshop ships on Mars with Apple Silicon"

gumby2• 5 years ago

Finally! We live in a networked world now. These regional publishing restrictions have to go!

ant6n• 5 years ago

Albedo Photodrop-ships on Mars with Apple-Silicon.

marshmallow_122• 5 years ago

i did read that the mars rover uses Apple processors. It's good to know that it can also send funny pictures back to Earth, now.

gumby2• 5 years ago

Yes, it should read “for Macs with”

1f60c2• 5 years ago

You’re not alone. “Adobe has finished porting most of Photoshop to Apple M1” would have been unambiguous.

codq• 5 years ago

'porting' is a relatively insider term.

"Adobe Photoshop arrives on Macs with Apple Silicon" might be how I'd phrase it.

333c• 5 years ago

Or even "ships for" rather than "ships on"

johnklos• 5 years ago

Yes. "ships for" would obviously be more correct than "ships on".

marshmallow_122• 5 years ago

i hate these preloaded bloatwares that come on your computers. they don't even work and only exist to remind you to give them money, in order to unlock features you didn't know you needed.

14• 5 years ago

This was my thought as well since I thought photoshop went way of the subscription. Effectively bloatware some customers will have to mess around to delete. But that is where my complaining ends as someone who runs windows 10 sigh

grishka5• 5 years ago

If I recall correctly, this was the case 15 (?) years back

I recently installed Mac OS 9 on an emulator just to see what it was like. First thing I noticed was that there was a lot of third-party software that came with it both preinstalled and as extra on the installation CD. Heck, even iTunes used an installer made by a third party! That felt very un-Apple to me.

thrwn_frthr_awy• 5 years ago

iTunes came from an acquisition of SoundJam. Apple didn’t have much first party apps at the time, so it was important to include software to make the computer usable out of the box.

Terretta3• 5 years ago

even iTunes used an installer made by a third party! That felt very un-Apple to me.

Yes, everything installed differently, updated differently, and maintaining currency across a large application set was unreasonable without third party subscriptions like “Mac Update”! It was crazy.

And yet, it seems majority of HN wants to rewind from the App Store which was created as to assist users and devs with that problem.

Lammy• 5 years ago

This is speculation, but this may be related to resource compression and them trying to get the iTunes download size as small as possible since so many people were on dialup at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26415883

System 7 added that overall capability, and Apple shipped 4 different built-in resource compression algorithms over the years (the last of those added in OS 9), but it was equally possible for third parties to ship their own decompression routine's machine code along with the other resources. I remember iTunes using InstallerVISE, and I know VISE came with its own compression routines.

ekzy• 5 years ago

My first read was really confusing. I kind of blanked out that photoshop was from Adobe and read that “Adobe photoshopped ships on macs” as in ships photoshopped on images of Macs for some marketing reason.

galago• 5 years ago

There was a time when Apple was shipping dual-processor G4s, but Mac OS 9, in general, could only use one processor. There was a system extension that allowed Photoshop to use both. A co-worker of mine had one, and it was very much a system used for running Photoshop. At that time OS X was considered too slow for professional work. So bundling made a lot of sense.

leoc• 5 years ago

If I recall correctly, this was the case 15 (?) years back

I don't know for sure that it never happened, but I don't think it ever did, partly because Apple and Adobe were not particularly friendly around that time: https://arstechnica.com/staff/2008/04/rhapsody-and-blues/ .

robbyking• 5 years ago

Completely off topic, but I love stumbling upon old articles by John Siracusa.

cratermoon• 5 years ago

Apple and Adobe were not particularly friendly

Which is hilarious, because you could make a good case that neither would still exist today without the other. I'd qualify that by saying Adobe products work find on Microsoft operating systems now, but without the Mac years I'm not sure the Windows port would have ever caught on.

antihero• 5 years ago

Seems it would be a benefit to both of them

Except the brand damage from ruining the "pure" experience that doesn't come preloaded with a bunch of 3rd party apps...

geon• 5 years ago

Especially if it would still require a subscription. I hate that kind of bloatware oems insists to fill up windows installs with.

scintill76• 5 years ago

Maybe a free license included with the OS/hardware combo then; installing is user-initiated.

smoldesu• 5 years ago

It already comes with Apple TV preloaded, whether you like it or not. Apple isn't adverse to frontloading you with subscription models, as long as it's a Premium™ experience.

e-clinton• 5 years ago

That’s exactly how I read it. My minds was blown for a sec.

Solocomplex• 5 years ago

It would imply the built in photo editor isn't good enough for most users.

nodesocket• 5 years ago

I was like, oh sweet I can cancel my insanely expensive Adobe creative cloud monthly subscription when I buy the new 16” M1. Nope, to good to be true.

tsieling• 5 years ago

That's exactly how I read it and my immediate reaction was 'hard no'. Glad it was a misread because bad things lie down that path.

racl101• 5 years ago

Yeah, I read the same thing too.

wukerplank• 5 years ago

Amazing accomplishment considering how long they struggled when the PowerPC->Intel transition happened.

dylan6042• 5 years ago

The 32bit->64bit transition was emabarassing for Adobe too

robertoandred• 5 years ago

And the OS 9 -> OS X transition.

Gaelan• 5 years ago

There are still a few features we haven’t finished porting to run on the new M1 chip, primarily a couple of those we most recently shipped (Invite to Edit Cloud Documents, Preset Syncing, most notably).

This is an interesting detail—I'm surprised that either of these features are things that wouldn't "just work" when compiled for another architecture.

juusto• 5 years ago

With Apple Silicon I wish Apple and Adobe would bang their coconuts together to bring the full versions of Lr/Ps to the iPad.

BooneJS• 5 years ago

It was my understanding that apps without special x86-only inlined assembly would be straightforward to port. This could hint that LR, as slow as it is, actually has special vectorized or otherwise performance-boosted sections of code.

ibraheemdev• 5 years ago

And here I am still waiting for Photoshop to come to Linux.

preommr2• 5 years ago

This is never going to happen.

wheelie_boy• 5 years ago

2021 is the year of linux on the desktop, I just know it

lostgame• 5 years ago

Please explain how putting development resources into firstly, porting; and secondly, supporting, a fourth (MacOS, iPadOS, Windows and then Linux) platform that ~1% of non-server computers use works, business-wise?

Especially then they're not selling the products for several hundred to start, and moved to a subscription model...

From what I've experienced and read, the cost of supporting a platform has to be greater than its sales.

The second issue with this is that many people use Linux to specifically avoid using closed-source software.

No part about Photoshop on Linux makes sense, from any sort of serious business end. They haven't even done an Android tablet port of full-fledged Photoshop, and I haven't really read any plans to support it.

If WINE wasn't a thing, or GIMP wasn't a thing...well, even then; no. This would never happen. XD

pixelbath2• 5 years ago

Good luck. I had enough and dropped my Adobe paid subscription because they decided Windows 8.1 was a verboten platform for some reason. Not Windows versions prior to 8.1, mind you, because Windows 7 and regular Windows 8 was still supported. Also the same day I purchased all the Affinity products (which, incidentally, cost as much as 1.5 months of Creative Cloud subscription): https://twitter.com/pixelbath/status/1268767475685945344/pho...

Completely baffling to me, and I've built a huge chunk of my design career using Adobe tools.

ryanmarsh• 5 years ago

Obligatory comment about how fast my M1 Mac is and how the battery lasts forever.

dillondoyle2• 5 years ago

The last year of Mac Photoshop has been a PITA.

Specifically it has a horrible horrible draw/render bug. it blanks out with grey for 90% of the image after switching a tab and some other tasks.

You have to zoom in or out for it to re-display the entire canvas.

The recent 2021 install has the same problem. I have the highest upgraded 2019 16"

whywhywhywhy3• 5 years ago

Don't worry it's total trash on Windows these days too, I use both platforms and its a complete jank-fest on both with dog slow UI redraw and even basic painting app functionality that ran fine on systems 20 years ago is now slow and glitchy.

(recent Intel MacBook Pro and high end multi-GPU workstation PC)

Adobe started to rest on their laurels about 6 years ago and the results of that choice get more prominent each year as bitrot sets in. Nothing about their software is empowering anymore it's actually just limiting when you see what your computer is truly capable of in software that is written to make use of its modern power.

Within 5 years every piece of Adobe software will be displaced and people will be looking back in disbelief asking "How could they fall so far, they owned the market?"

Also gonna do my part to help their downfall, if you (unfortunately have to for work) pay £49.94 a month to use full Creative Cloud you're being ripped off, I've only paid £30.34 a month for 4 years now, when it's renewal time just keep telling them you're cancelling and it's too expensive and after about 5 minutes of pushing they'll knock a lot off.

jacurtis3• 5 years ago

it has a horrible horrible draw/render bug. it blanks out with grey for 90% of the image

Oh so that wasn't just my hardware? I didn't realize it was a widespread issue. I've been experiencing that bug for at least a year now. I could go on, but there aren't enough hours left in the day.

dillondoyle2• 5 years ago

good to know it's not just my machine either! i have had the board replaced because the screen did this weird pixels/green thing.

jordache5• 5 years ago

At first, I thought the OP wrote a bad title.. This is the same heading from the adobe blog. Terrible copy writers, and terrible publication approval process over there.

s_dev• 5 years ago

What happened to that war Steve Jobs declared on Adobe?

leadingthenet• 5 years ago

It only happened in your imagination.

The only war declared was on Flash, and they've won that ages ago.

usui• 5 years ago

How has the relationship been between Apple and Adobe ever since Steve Jobs declared war on Adobe Flash and effectively being the final nail in the coffin for Flash? Seems like there would be a lot to repair when even Adobe snarked back

jacurtis3• 5 years ago

Well that was a decade ago (2011)... Welcome to 2021.

Adobe and Apple have been working together for a long time since then. Appearing in keynotes, doing demos on screen, and directly referencing eachother's products.

Whatever hatchet they had with eachother (if they ever did) is buried.

whywhywhywhy3• 5 years ago

I can't be the only one who read the list of features that are not finished porting yet and thought "Yeah makes sense".

Current day photoshop feels like a duct taped ball of random systems and frameworks that somehow function within the same app, until you get a few too many OS updates ahead then parts of that system start breaking.

dear-leader• 5 years ago

scotth• 5 years ago

I have no stake in this, but at the mention of Photoshop I have to say...I bought Affinity Photo a couple weeks back, and it's fantastic. Runs without issue on my underpowered MacBook Air, and cost less than $40. I'm super happy to see such a strong competitor in this space.

https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/photo/

Adobe Photoshop ships on Macs with Apple Silicon

Related Stories