Port to Linux?

Renegade Penguin

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 7:24:41 PM4/23/03

to

Is there any real support at Adobe to port to the Linux platform? With all the recent flap about Crossover Office supporting Photoshop, I have heard a LOT of people saying it's just cheaper to buy Crossover Office and just pirate a copy of Photoshop. And that's just plain WRONG.

I think that Adobe ought to partner with some quality programmers to get Photoshop ported to Linux. All of the major movie houses - Dreamworks, Industrial Light & Magic, Pixar - they've all abandoned the SGI workstations for Linux server farms. Shrek, Ice age, you name it, if it's animated, it's made in Linux now.

The userbase grows DAILy for Linux, and Adobe can just release binaries - they don't have to go Open Source, either.

I know personally know a programming team at one of the major Linux OSes, and they've got the programming skills to do a port like that. Somebody tell me PLEASE that Adobe is interested in doing this?

It's easy enough if you have a machine like mine to run Windows under Linux under VMware (which itself is expensive) and run Photoshop in there, but not everyone has 3 gigs of memory like I do.

Anyway, that's my two cents. What do you think?

Renegade Penguin

Gary Hummell

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 7:35:27 PM4/23/03

to

Renegade, this is a forum for Windows users of Photoshop. Do you have a question that would fall into that category?

Renegade Penguin

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 8:06:46 PM4/23/03

to

EXACTLY. There isn't a Linux forum, although I see a lot of "this program runs under XYZ emulator," so obviously there IS a call for this. I'm not the only one, am I?

SERIOUSLY, I could get a team assembled for Adobe OVERNIGHT of some pretty zealous quality programmers (I run in that sort of circle) that could get a port to Linux, and get a new revenue stream for Adobe. I doubt they'd be against making some nice bucks off of the new product.

Renegade Penguin

Mac McDougald

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 7:42:22 PM4/23/03

to

Oh, lighten up ...
It's not like there's an Adobe Linux formum after all..

Mac

Stuart McCoy

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 8:01:39 PM4/23/03

to

Renegade Penguin,

Adobe used to have UNIX versions of their software available for atleast IRIX and Solaris. Nobody purchased them. Also they see little to no benefit in porting to Linux as many proprietary titles have failed to sell well, and in many cases wound up costing the company money or forcing them to close their doors. This doesn't even get into theproblems with the various window managers, toolkits and dependency problems amongst the Linux distros.

It may be cheaper to buy Crossover Office and pirate Photoshop but if you are willing to pirate Photoshop anyway, wouldn't it be cheaper to simply pirate Photoshop for Linux? Don't hold your breath, Photoshop for Linux won't be coming out anytime soon.

If you want to run Photoshop on a UNIX OS you'll need to buy a Mac.

Mac McDougald

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 7:41:50 PM4/23/03

to

> Somebody tell me PLEASE that Adobe is interested in doing this?

Adobe is interested in anything that makes a buck, eh?
If they see the profit in it, they'll do it.

Will PS not run under some implementation of WINE?
(dumb question, prolly, but I don't know much about Linux)

Mac

Renegade Penguin

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 8:11:00 PM4/23/03

to

So who says Adobe has to pay for the port? It wouldn't cost them a dime if they could get someone ELSE to do it. Adobe LICENSES the code - a much better way to go.

One of the great things about Linux is that the better apps are really only made for ONE GUI instead of several. Just make the thing for KDE and the Gnome people would have to live with that. And besides, if Photoshop ran on ONE Linux platform, there would be a race to install that OS on everyone's boxes.

And I'm NOT willing to pirate Photoshop - I think that's severely WRONG. One of the cool things about Linux is that you hardly EVER find anyone who pirates a native Linux app if it's not freeware. They'll pirate the windows app, but support the native Linux release.

Too bad I have no idea who to talk with at Adobe about getting them to license their code to someone. Anyone else know?

Renegade Penguin

hot_denim

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 8:23:33 PM4/23/03

to

As A UNIX/Linux experienced user. I can say, that it won't make much business. Linux has changed over recent years from being a hardcore UNIX text type interface with maybe X-Windows If you were lucky. But X windows is not good (compared to Win95+) as the orignial setup, nor with window managers. KDE desktop is definatly a whole load better and has given Linux a new face.... but there other things that give it the userbase...and it has not got them. Win 32-bit (Mac) Vs.s Linux. Win 32-bit wins......along way... Linux is not a OS for a normal user, its a OS for a unix user even also with KDE. Yes you could put a Non Unix user on Linux KDE and they could use it.... but when things go wrong etc...., etc....

dave milbut

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 8:13:45 PM4/23/03

to

I have heard a LOT of people saying it's just cheaper to buy Crossover
Office and just pirate a copy of Photoshop. And that's just plain WRONG.

They should buy a copy of photoshop AND Crossover office. Or THEY'RE just plain WRONG.

but if you are willing to pirate Photoshop anyway, wouldn't it be cheaper
to simply pirate Photoshop for Linux?

or just pirate windows and photoshop and run a dual boot?

Do you see how stupid this sounds? If people are gonna pirate it, they're gonna pirate it. Some might even get caught!

hot_denim

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 9:07:14 PM4/23/03

to

I do, when im on UNIX machine, and require an image editor.

Rene Walling

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 8:42:21 PM4/23/03

to

Renegade Penguin

Why don't you run the GIMP instead? Everything would be legal and you can do it now.

Robert Oliver

unread,

Apr 23, 2003, 9:23:45 PM4/23/03

to

So who says Adobe has to pay for the port? It wouldn't cost them a dime
if they could get someone ELSE to do it. Adobe LICENSES the code - a much
better way to go.

Adobe is NOT going to let someone mess with the crown jewel of their product line. This will not happen.

Chris Cox

unread,

Apr 24, 2003, 11:31:47 PM4/24/03

to

Penguin - I guess you've never heard of support costs, or QA/QE.

You don't have to talk to Adobe at all --- just go create a Linux market that would pay for commercial software, and convince some programmers to come up with reasonably stable standards for Linux (drivers, fonts, color management, GUI (X derivatives don't count), etc.).

BTW - don't believe the self serving Linux press releases about major effects houses. Yes, they have some Linux. But they also have a strong base of MacOS and Windows. Also, render machines don't have to be the same platform as design machines. (one 3D project I did: developed on Mac, scripted on DEC, debugged on Apollo, rendered on Omron, output on Sony).

Stuart McCoy

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 9:44:20 AM4/25/03

to

"...convince some programmers to come up with reasonably stable standards for Linux (drivers, fonts, color management, GUI (X derivatives don't count), etc.)."

I've always wondered why no one has done with Linux what MacOS X did with FreeBSD.

dave milbut

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 12:02:41 PM4/25/03

to

Maybe Adobe could get into the OS business.. <VBG>!

JasonSmith

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 12:40:54 PM4/25/03

to

If they did that - then who could get the blame?

Adobe cant blame Microsoft or Apple, and Microsoft and Apple couldnt blame Adobe if something goes ballistic.

Photo Help

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 1:23:43 PM4/25/03

to

Stuart,

"I've always wondered why no one has done with Linux what MacOS X did with FreeBSD."

No one else can afford to for the desktop market. To do so would put you in competition with everyone else.

SGI has Irix.
Sun has Solaris.
Cray has Unicos.

It isn't worth it for companies like Dell, Gateway, HP, etc. to make their own OS.

If we see anything like that it will be from Microsoft.

hot_denim

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 1:56:50 PM4/25/03

to

........let throw something strong into the equation.......

forget linux, how about BeOS (if its still around) ? (Its unix'ish, but not a unix clone). It was MADE,MADE for video/graphics. I.e. It has huge filesize limits data transfer etc... If theres an OS for audio/Video BeoS is it.

hot_denim

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 1:44:53 PM4/25/03

to

Photo

Solaris is also on PC,.... I used it.

Microsft's UNIX ?, they had one...back in late eighties called Xenix , but it discontinued in early/mid ninties..

Stuart McCoy

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 2:05:12 PM4/25/03

to

hot_denim,

There is a group of individuals who are in the process of creating an open source OS as close to BeOS as possible. They are trying to implement everything down to the APIs and initially the UI.

Phosphor

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 5:12:09 PM4/25/03

to

"Maybe Adobe could get into the OS business.. ."

Somewhere in the foggy wayback I remember reading a speculative piece about the what-if's and how-to's regarding this sort of thing. The guy who wrote it made some pretty good arguments for extrapolating and expanding the Adobe conventions to encapsulate a full OS.

Made some decent sense at the time.

dave milbut

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 5:54:47 PM4/25/03

to

Anyone else get the feeling this was another drive-by trolling? :)

KJ

unread,

Apr 25, 2003, 11:41:51 PM4/25/03

to

Licensing.

Apple doesn't have to release the code for OSX and can charge money for it,
the license with Linux is not quite so profitable for Apple. Just as well,
I prefer FreeBSD to Linux in general.

"Stuart McCoy" <mem...@adobeforums.com> wrote in message
news:1de8d...@WebX.la2eafNXanI...