There has been a flurry of posts going around Twitter today about an Adobe Engineering asking Linux users to place requests for Creative Suite apps for Linux. While the geek in me thinks “Cool, they totally should!” The businessman in me says that this has no chance of ever getting of the ground.
Of course this sentiment is well challenged, but I just don’t believe that the Linux desktop community at large is willing to pay for software, especially software that costs between $1,300 and $2,600. Of course this is speaking from a sweeping generalization of Linux users, a broad stereotype, but one I think is well deserved and relatively accurate. Of course it’s not without exception, but come on…
Quick, hurry, name a company that has made big money selling desktop applications for Linux! What? You can’t think of one? Me either.
There is a reason for that, the market is as big as the audience is willing to spend and outside of big ticket apps like Massive or Maya (that benefit from big ass clusters that are just cost prohibitive to do with Windows or OS X), creative types live in paid OSes.
There are of course many many reasons:
- Adobe apps aren’t the only apps they need
- Support is important
- You use what the people you work with/for use
- The general population just doesn’t trust or “get” Linux.
I could rattle reasons off all day. The reality is that Linux as a desktop operating system is just not taken seriously. Sure if you rattle the cages of the most vocal 2% of the web you will get thousands of thousands of responses, but that doesn’t make any sort of statistically significant sample of the users that are willing to plunk down their plastic and pay $2,600 for an application.
That’s the thing with a lot of these guys, if you ask a loaded question like “Should Adobe release the Creative Suite for Linux?” you are going to get every Linux gearhead on the planet saying “Hell yea!” But if you were to ask for pre-orders, you’d probably get 100 if that.
I work for a big software company and the hard reality is that developing software is incredibly expensive. Adobe is not going to even consider something like this until there is a proven market for it.
You can talk all you want about being a leader or pioneer, but nobody wants to lead their company into the red.
I have current paid license for Adobe’s Creative Suite, Lightroom, ProTools, Logic Studio, Final Cut, Office, Windows, OS X, iWork… I pay for software. The honest to God truth is that if I could get ALL of that software at half price on Linux, I still wouldn’t do it. I regularly use Fedora, I have used Ubuntu, Debian and a dozen other Linux OSes over the years and they just don’t “feel” right.
I am a firm believer in “you get what you pay for.” As much as I love to play with Linux, and wouldn’t look anywhere outside of LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP) for my Web Development projects, I wouldn’t even consider it on any of my machines as a desktop OS. I keep the latest flavors of Fedora and Ubuntu on a VM so I can see what they are up to and what’s new, but I’d never use it for real work.
Editor’s Note: As much as this probably seems like flame bait, I want Linux to improve and compete, and I think in time it can. The problem that it faces (and one that Ubuntu is uniquely positioned to solve) is that group development can only take you so far. You need a leader, you need to make changes that are for the good of the user, and you need to test against people who aren’t hardcore Linux users to see if you are succeeding or not. They are taking a great step in dumping Gnome. I would start to look even harder at taking out some of the cheesy apps that come bundled, and spend a whole release on polish. The core is there, it just doesn’t feel right.
Tweet
They are not dumping Gnome, in fact you’ll be easily able to switch to a Gnome session at login. Secondly, i know plenty of people who would rather spend money on a Linux version of Photoshop or the rest of Adobe CS, than buy a completely new, expensive, Apple computer – the money they save not buying it goes on the software.
perfectly agree.
I would love to dump Microsoft for so long. All PC has been switched to Ubuntu except the one and only one computer which needs Create Suite on it. Everything run so smooth now. I don’t see there is a point to continue to pay Microsoft Tax while there are lots better choice out there.
You are welcome to dump Microsoft. You can install Creative Suite on a Mac… is your beef with Microsoft or just with paying for software, you have other options.
What is plenty? 10? These are the same people that in a different argument say “Gimp is just as good as Photoshop and it’s free, OSS ftw!”
yes, some people may thing Gimp is as good as PS, but after trying to use it, its really not as good. I could use it for casual use but not for production use.
In fact, PS is not what a designer needs, but a whole suite is needed.
I’m talking about people new to Linux
Then I definitely disagree. Someone willing to put $2600 into Creative Suite has no problem spending $1500 on a pc/Mac with support and a warranty. It’s likely for a business, therefor a write-off, and they aren’t going to learn a new alien os to save a few bucks. They want to use what the people they trust and work with use.
No man, I would like to pay 1500$ to Adobe for Design Standard applications (part of CS) and to pay no more for any software.
Second, bigger reason, is reliability of Linux OS
I agree with Alex. Moreover, there is a not-insignificant population whose only hangup from migrating to Adobe products is lack of Linux support. Additionally, there is probably a larger population who who are waiting for Adobe support before switching to Linux. Linux and Adobe could do great things for each other.
Agree, to some people Linux could be an alien, but I introduce Linux to some non-technical windows users, they could adopt to it in less then a week. I believe it won’t be long that Linux will further capture Windows market shares. By then, Adobe should consider to release a Linux version of their design suite.
The bottom line, and missed point, is that Adobe could not afford to develop a version for even paying linux users because there are not enough (even if EVERY Adobe on Linux User paid) to pay for the cost of building it. It’s just simple economics.
I’d almost go to say that’s a stretch because now that person has a PC with nothing on it? No Windows? No OS X? They have hundreds of dollars for software but are going to run it on spare parts they got from their uncle?
For me, I would rather pay money to by linux software rather then paying tax to Microsoft.
paying for a product is not tax. lol. Is buying your computer tax? I guess Microsoft should keep paying people to write software (like me ironically) and just close up shop when they run out of money?
it depends on people how they take th Linux important or not
Yes, the support part is essential, but if you look at the numbers you will see that switching to Linux has better ROI than Mac or Windows, in the case of Windows you will also need Antivirus software wich increases the cost, in the other hand nowadays Apple has the same hardware as every other computer company with the diference that they are very expensive (and faggy design) so if you can afford a decent machine and then put any Linux distro then you have more money to spend in real software, but yes and again, tech support is essential to many customers.
@Cocolio Except Windows Live Security Essentials is free and widely regarded as a fantastic antivirus/antimalware app.
It might be great compared to other Windows security applications, but it can’t touch an unprotected Ubuntu installation. By virtue of being Linux, any Linux distro will experience significantly fewer problems than a well-protected Windows system.
Google has always been a very good Tech Support. From my experience, as long as you search, over 95% of the case can be solved.
A search engine is NOT Technical Support, it’s Technical Support TO Technical Support. It’s gibberish to a user.
yeah, u r right buddie, im using it on my desktop and Avast on my lappie, both are neat AV software, and also i use Comodo Firewall (free version) but the problem is that AV soft taskes mem and CPU resources, while in Linux you can use only a Firewall, wich in my security point of view is very necessary for any OS in this world, and that is why i see that Linux can become a great contender for other OSs, even there can be a customized distro only for designing dont you think?
@Cocolio No, I really don’t. I think we hit the bar with PC power where the CPU tax is insignificant. I haven’t upgraded my main PC in several years, it still runs just fine, with AV. It’s a Core 2 Duo 2.66 with 4GB Ram. I think as Mac is starting to see, Linux would suffer the same fate. With market share comes being a target. When there are millions to compromise, people concert effort on it. If Linux had Windows install base, it would require it as well.
Really? Because ambiguity aside, Linux machines prove to be some of the toughest to crack (or rather, they are easiest to protect). Obviously, as they become more popular, there will be more successful attacks on un- or weakly-protected machines; however, all-else equal, Linux will always beat Windows in terms of security, by virtue of low level organization.
Tack onto that Linux’s stability and it’s dominance in the increasingly-popular non-desktop environments, it’s becoming a great time to learn to play nicely with Linux.
And to address an earlier point of yours, there are still plenty of applications that can and do benefit from a boost in processor speed. I just installed an AMD Phenom II 3.4 GHz Quad Core in my machine and I still max it out running certain processes. And there’s plenty of innovation to be had not only with clock speed, but also with computational strategy–hence the move toward integrated graphics and hardware acceleration.
Who the hell buys the entire CS suite? Most people I know only want Photoshop
I bought the design suite standard, I wanted Illustrator also and it’s cheaper than buying both separately.
Oh and that whole market share = more vulnerable to viruses is BS,
I am sorry you believe that. But if you were a bank robber, and town a had one bank, and town b had 20, which one are you going to target? I think it’s common sense that someone in the business of compromising computers, knowing that the volume of compromise is directly related to the end-result damage, is going to choose to target the system with the greatest volume. It’s common sense.
This subject has been discussed in depth:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1207630
cariboo907:
“The reason it is so hard to create malware, is that Linux was designed from the start to be a multi-user system. When you have multi-users running on the system at the same time you want to keep their data seperated so no-one else has access to it. That is also why you have to be root to install system wide applications.
The biggest security problem on the linux desktop is the user, if the user can be social engineered into installing malicious software, then he has a problem.
The other problem with open ports is a matter of common sense. If you are behind a router and you have no ports forwarded you can run all the services you want. Personally I have ftp, samba, smtp, apache, cups and mysql all running on my server, but none of the services are outward facing. The minute you open a service to the outside world, you better know what you are doing. One of the biggest holes is vnc, usually because of weak passwords. Ssh can be a problem too again becayse of weak passwords. If you plan on opening any services to the world, I would suggest a password length of at least 8 characters and you shouldn’t be able to find it in the dictionary.
Any linux distibution is much more secure out of the box than any Windows version.”
Very valid points across the board. The problem, which you stated yourself, comes with the users. If Linux were to gain wide adoption, it would grow a considerably less educated average level of user. Either software builders would take shortcuts to try to make software easier to use, or users would make mistakes to make their life easier (like reading a blog that says “log in as root instead to get rid of that message”
Well i suggest a less educated average level of user get’s ChromeOS
If 15 years in the computer industry has taught me anything, it’s that nothing is ever completely secure. Some more than others, but I *truly* believe, that anything popular enough to benefit a hacker in some way, can and will be compromised. Doesn’t matter what it is or who made it.
There’s a lot to be said for the probability of your machine being compromised. Moreover, unless you have some UBER VALUABLE INFORMATION, you don’t have to have an impenetrable machine–you only have to have a machine that is more of a pain in the ass to crack than most others.
In the current ecosystem, that is pretty much anything except Windows.
I completelly agree, the real threat to computer security is the end user, no matter what OS is in use, social engineering is very harmfull in less educated coputer user and no matter what counter measures are installed or running, in that case i preffer to setup a Administrator password and set other users unable to install any programme, unless of course you have the Admin password.
Anyway i still think that Linux is a good alternative and Adobe and Autodesk should have their versions for it, for example, VMware has versions for LInux (Windows and Mac too) that are paid versions, but the people who use them are sys admins and alike, people who can manage as much as money as designers do, so i dont think that money is a limiting factor for it, is just user adaption.
I hear ya, it’s just about the definition of should. Should in an altruistic, should be available sense, yea, no problem. Should in a “it’s financially responsible for a public company to dedicate resources to a most likely money losing proposition” probably not. That’s all I am saying. Coming from Microsoft, I see what kind of resources are required to build software at that level. It’s incredibly expensive. If Adobe can quantify a market and prove it’s willing to pay and make a return for it’s shareholders, go for it. My point is simply that I don’t think it can.
Resources can be significantly reduced if you employ efficient, well-organized problem-solving strategies (solid lower levels make for more solid upper levels). From an outside perspective, it doesn’t seem like MS has learned this at all.
Googles approach of using custom WINE setup with Picasa is one way Adobe could port CS to Linux, since Photoshop works to a degree in WINE, it wouldn’t take too much effort for Adobe to make it work.
“make it work”, yes. Make it rock solid, and supportable without losing your ass paying tech support technicians to troubleshoot it all the different flavors of Linux? Probably not.
Well Google seem to manage it fine with Picasa, Google Earth and others
Yes. There are plenty of companies that stick to Qt and other platform-independent toolkit and do not have any problem supporting a shitload of platform.
There are commercial support for Qt available and its not that expensive.
Hi there.
Well i have setup Adobe CS4 in my Ubuntu boxes (both desktop and lappie) using playonLInux, all i have to say that PS and is faster than in Windows, but its like having a native app for Linux.
This should happen!
I love Linux, and Adobe products. Both would be one of the best things to ever happen.
Linux is taking over, i’ve seen an increase in programs becoming developed for Linux as of late. I say another 5 years, and windows will be missing out.
Your argument is totally idiotic, stupid, and invalid.
Linux users will pay for it, the best example is Foundry’s NUKE X for linux, much more expensive and specialized software than Adobe AfterFX for example. And sell very, very well… Just imagine Adobe…
Moron.
Clearly you have no idea how much it costs to develop something like Creative Suite. It would take MILLIONS of sales to break even.. I won’t buy for a minute that there are millions of Linux users waiting to drop a few thousand dollars on a Creative Suite.
Sales aren’t the only source of revenue. Consider the increasing number of devices and applications that Linux currently dominates–why wouldn’t you want to start writing code for which parts are easy to port to say, an android phone? Moreover, consider the cost savings associated with a dramatically simpler development process, reduced tech support, etc.
These are all considerations that would, by themselves, take a long time to pay off, but considering Linux’s explosive popularity, they are important considerations nonetheless.
I disagree – slightly. You’re catagorically saying the development costs wouldn’t justify a small number, realistically let’s say a thousand, copies. But how much work would it be? They can give it an emulator-style wrapper in, what, a week’s worth of coding?
There are a number of production environments I can think of that could benefit from that. Advertising agencies, particularly large-scale ad agencies like Young & Rubicam or Leo Burnett with high turnover rates for equipment and people would have better computers for lower-end, starting designers and effects engineers, as well as a more flexible architectures to grow over time. I agree, most people won’t get it, and I don’t think your average user or even your average production studio would bother, but … I’m in a graduating class of 300 geeks, all of whom are designers and computer nerds. I’m sure at least half of the people in my class would be interested in building their own workstation, and not having to lay down cash for an operating system frees up cash for the inevitable need for hard drives, spiffier processors, and more RAM.
I don’t this that costing is a big problem in linux community or size of the comminity, this is all bullshit. because there are plenty of commercial softwares that is much more costlier than adobe cs comes in linux version like Autodesk Maya, softimage …..
, Nuke , Mari, Eyeon Fusion, Composite, Boujou, Realflow, etc… do your think these companies are stupid, “NO” . Adobe guy’s are cynical.
“I could rattle reasons off all day. The reality is that Linux as a desktop operating system is just not taken seriously.” you have no fucking idea what you are talking about. Look at Redhat and IBM…man…tell me why the hell 80%percent of servers in the enterprise business is runing on AIX, HP-UX, Solaris or Debian, or Redhat ..there is no core banking system which run on win server. have you ever thought about why all of the fucking storages runs unix based opsys, basically anything beside win?? becasue it works.
and you say that the creative guys are on win and mac??? you cant be serious..no man…think it over. the retards are on mac and win. Sorry to say, but to run a linux, even an ubuntu, needs more creativity from you than any other system. And yes. there are be thoudand of people like me, who only run windows in virtual machine becasue of a fucking excel macro, or because of the shitty creative suite which is so perferct that there is no alternative. and yes believe me, we would buy it for linux as well.
+1 this comment
I come back on this subject because things have changed quite a while. The “official” alternative to microsoft is now moving away from pro user. osx is moving toward cloud-ipad-bluriness (lion, moutain-lion), and pro are left alone. I don’t feel like going to microsoft because I left it years ago and wouldn’t like to move back (although it seems to have improved quite well). So what are the alternatives ? Linux is the only exciting thing I can see (and I must say I have NEVER used it). But as apple is becoming the new microsoft, I really start to look for something else (and I’m no programmer… I’m a photographer). With the no-flash thing apple attacked first, Adobe should reply by giving a linux creative suite. It would certainly create a move towards linux as adobe weight is big, and all other smaller applications will make the move.
Then comes the hardware question… What if adobe or google creates a linux centered hardware solution… This would definitely give confidence to pro like me.
We don’t need a Linux version of the Creative Suite. Just make sure the existing Windows version will work with WINE.
I would love to have CS6 on linux. The new versions of KDE & Gnome are fantastic
& I now use linux for main usage of browsing, email etc
Would love to have more serious apps for linux so I can ditch Apple & MS who dont need more money to put in the bank from us.
I just stumbled in on this and i know it is quite an old post. I just want to point out that there is some fairly expensive software for Linux, Houdini is one of them, nuke another. This is because Hollywood use lots of Linux to save money on licenses. There it would give quite a bit of status for Adobe to get a foot in.
Very expensive software can be successful on Linux because it costs enough to justify development. Adobe apps by comparison are inexpensive and would require a large audience of paying users to justify the cost of development and support.
Your forgetting the professional sector. Such as post houses and graphic design firms. most vfx houses(there are a lot of them) use linux because its easier to network and maintain. Check out the foundry http://www.thefoundry.uk.co this is the top company for vfx work and they support linux. The big problem is that they can’t run adobe so they have 1 or 2 stations dedicated for it. These companies would jump all over a linux version.
Not forgetting. Again, I work on Microsoft Office. There are 5,000 employees working on Office. Adobe is similarly as large. Even a hundred thousand paying customers would mean losing money. The volume of potential paying customers just is not there.
I hate to say, your entire argument is complete crap. The reason Linux OS’s are such a security powerhouse is that the majority of malicious activity that is done to other systems, is done from a Linux based computer. Hackers and programmers are not going to attack their own systems. Also, Adobe has already started to venture into creating apps for Linux distros. Take a look at the Adobe applications for Android. If your argument is that returns would not be sufficient, then you need to recalculate. The majority of people that would get those apps are people who want to be able to work on the go, while doing the creative work to go along with the desktop versions. Those apps only cost a few bucks a piece to download. As far as Linux goes, there has been a large growth over the past few years that just keeps getting bigger. Yes your average computer user has a difficult time with the learning curve of Linux. However, with growth come the necessity to simplify the OS to make it usable by the masses. Take a look at Windows and Apple. Starting out they were DOS based and very difficult to utilize unless you knew what you were doing. As time progressed and they became even more popular, they have become easier to work with over time. Windows has done a fantastic job ironing out issues with Windows 7, however it will never compare to the flexibility, security, and resource usage of Linux. The biggest thing that hurts Linux right now is the fact that there are so many varieties of Linux. If there was a unification of Linux, to create one major flavor it would greatly improve the chances of Linux stepping further to the front and over shadowing. Hell if that were to happen, I am even sure that if it were offered at a fair price, in order to compensate those individuals who have devoted their time to developing the OS without raping peoples pockets. It would probably turn OSX and Windows into things of the past. The largest argument that people have with Windows and OSX is the pricetags involved. They don’t really care about the end users. They are more about lining their pockets. Prime example being with the economy the way it is. Microsoft and Apple keep their software prices high like always when what the people need is lower prices in order to keep their means of living in balance. One last thing, your analogy about the two towns with the banks. I would go after the town with multiple banks rather than the town with the one bank. If you plan it out right you can create a distraction at one or more banks, while you rob one, increasing your odds of success.
You can also buy the Adobe creative suite full premium versions for less the half the price on ebay, including the latest edition.
Now that CS Cloud is out and getting Creative Suite is less money up front has your opinion changed or stayed put?
@Oliver: No, actually quite the opposite. Adobe will be guaranteeing more income over a longer period of time by making it accessible to more customers, but the cycle of a large influx of upgrade money will be gone. In the economy of developing software, I’d say it’s much less likely. Being someone who is in the business of porting software (I work on the team that makes the Mac port of the Windows version of Microsoft Office), even the act of porting software is incredibly expensive and in our case, just Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Outlook requires a team of hundreds of people. Multiply that by Photoshop, Lightroom, Premiere, After Effects, Illustrator, InDesign, Flash, Dreamweaver, Speedgrade, Muse, Acrobat, etc…. and it means it would take a massive team. If you were be conservative and said 250 people, and I would guess it’s much more, and average their salary to an also conservative $100,000 a year, you’re looking at $25,000,000. That’s 25 million a year in salary alone for a porting team of the size it would take. Now imagine that you’re selling your subscriptions for $50/mo. That’s 41,000 paying Linux customers you would have to have per year to break even on the cost of manpower alone. Factor in their benefits, office spaces, hardware, software, administration, etc. and you can probably nearly double that number. Based on that, I sincerely do NOT believe there are 100,000 Linux customers waiting in line to pay Adobe $50/mo. for Creative Suite. There ARE definitely Linux users who will buy software, but in a sure to cause me to be flamed sweeping generalization, most Linux users are either opposed to paying for software for pragmatic financial reasons, or more philosophical reasons. The numbers I’ve mentioned are simply break even numbers. Adobe isn’t in the business of breaking even, they are in the business of making money. Given that they want to make a profit, you can now double our already doubled number. Do you think there are 200,000 Linux users waiting in line to buy Creative Suite for Linux? I don’t.
the only reason i’m not on linux is because there’s no creative suite on it. if i refuse to work on windows, i’m forced to buy premium priced apple computers. not to say what stupid limitations and infrastructure-pitfalls you have to dodge when trying to get a max/win mixed high performance network going.
your argument is invalid. a good chunk of professionals would love to use powerful and cheap pc hardware on a decent operating system, ditch the expensive macs and the painful windows ‘experience’.
as its a lot more cost effective to build high end hardware and networking, if you have the software, its not hard to see how a huge number of users and companies would jump on linux as soon as they see the benefits. as so many places did in the vfx industry that have all the packages their need ported on linux already.
plus osx is based on unix as well, and just as porting smoke from linux to osx was possible for autodesk, cs would be a piece of cake for adobe.
Jason, I do agree with you on Adobe not wanting to port CS anything to Linux…I for one would love to see it in the future. But the market share is just not there right now. Linux is sitting around, what 1% to 3% of the desktop market share? Most of those people don’t want to pay for, or can not afford the software…and Adobe CS6 took a price hike when it came out.
With Apple being very slow to update the MAC Pro line it it putting some pro uses in a tough spot. Many long term and hard core Apple users go kicking a screaming to windows. I am not saying Windows is horrible but it does have problems, like crashing, freezing, high RAM usage, security, and so on. So when people have to switch they are not too happy about the move. For me, Windows is the most buggy, and OSX and Linux tie…kind of tie. My Linux systems run very well and don’t have too many problems…other than problems I create.
Linux has been growing somewhat rapidly in recent years, 1 to 2 years, I would love to see Adobe make the move to Linux with some of the recent MS and Apple moves. With Windows going more and more mobile focused and Apple putting most of its work into tablets, laptops, iThings in general, there is a clear hole in the Pro desktop market right now. Linux could be that filler. But the problem is lack of software in the Linux market to support the pro market. No company is going to move to linux for their A/V needs when there is little to no support for it. I think if Adobe was to offer a linux version of CS people would make the move to Linux, but not over night. It would be a gamble for Adobe, and then the question would be what flavor of Linux, my vote would be Ubuntu with the 12.04 being a 5 year LTS version. Ubuntu is the clear leader in the desktop Linux world right now. I think Adobe would see a profit in 1 or 2 years, but that is only if Linux takes hold of the pro market, it would also involve other software companies other than just Adobe.
If linux was more popular, lets say as popular as OSX is right now, then Adobe would support it, but sadly, it is not. Large amounts of people will not start using Linux tell the software is there to support it. This is just not Adobe moving to support Linux, it is Adobe, Microsoft, and others moving to support the Linux OS, and I just do not see that happening any time soon. This might happen if Windows popularity drops and Linux can pick up those users up, then and only then, will you see more support for Linux.
Ubuntu 12.04 and 12.10 are good, but they need to be cleaned up a bit. It is close, o so close. I am not a hardcore Linux user. I would call myself a power user, I know the system better than most, but I am not a terminal / command line guy, I Google for that. I think with a bigger user base and some time Ubuntu could be in a good position, but what is still missing is the software support of major companies, like Adobe and others, there are a few major companies out there that support Linux, but not many.
I will be one of those people waiting to move my Photo and video work to Linux. OSX has some quirks that I do not care for, Windows has always been a little buggy for me. I have done a few photo jobs using Linux but it takes more work and time then using the Lightroom / Photoshop workflow method I prefer using. If Adobe released CS to Linux I would change my computer back to Linux in a heartbeat, and I don’t think I am only one.
So when will MS start porting office to Linux?
Adobe is probably not going to develop for Linux’s current comparatively small market share, in spite of the OS being totally fit-for-purpose fot the majority of computer users. Its market share is small but from a technical point of view, Linux is in no way inferior and perfectly capable of running software that is developed for it.
What Adobe could do is what Sparx does with Enterprise Architect i.e. assist Wine usage.
Adobe doesn’t have a vested interest in keeping Microsoft artificially in business, so it would be ok for them to do.
One point you make is fallacious:
“Linux users don’t like paying for things”
News for you: no one likes paying for things. People, businesses, etc. That is why technological solutions and offshoring are being used to reduce head count. That is why no one pays for Google, Firefox, Internet Explorer, Adobe Reader, Adobe Flash, Skype etc. Hell, no one even really pays for Windows as most OEMs bundle it with PCs. Piracy of Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop is endemic, in the Windows, OS X and Linux communities. Paradoxically many Linux users I know use purchased copies that they run on Windows, an operating they only keep for that purpose. These people are designers etc. who have paid customers for their design work and do not use pirated copies. These people are potential customers for a Linux-based Adobe suite.
The fact is that software development doesn’t really cost a lot of money. Software developers became used to drawing large salaries for something that in of itself should be priced more as a commodity than a luxury item.
It is a similar story with journalism. How much does it really cost to write an article? Blogging has demonstrated that everyone has an opinion and some such as yourself can articulate that opinion well. However, does that mean you are entitled to draw a large salary for it?
@Simon: The fact that you can make a statement like “The fact is that software development doesn’t really cost a lot of money.” clearly explains that you know nothing about developing software. It’s not just about “huge salaries” it’s about extensive testing, infrastructure, support, marketing……
Adobe doesn’t need to create a Linux version of Creative Suite. All they need to do is ensure that it works with Wine. Why is this so difficult?
I am a mixed Mac/ Win user.
It is all true that it appears economically not wise for adobe to release a linux version considering the present marketshare of linux.
However there are a few more factors at work ..
- Ubuntu has matured to be usable for non-geeks
which makes it attractive for agencies
- Android is outgrowing WIN & IOS on the phone & pad sector rapidly
which can over the seamless combination of Android and Ubuntu make a difference
- Ubuntu has more developers but no commercial lobby
The whole “would Linux users buy expensive software” discussion is redundant as it is not the private households that make Adobes sales but the Agencies.
I worked in several agencies in Asia and Europe.
And most of them including me privately would love to switch to Ubuntu.
Less problems, easy networking and cheaper workstations are a good reason.
The only thing holding me & them back is the lack of the Adobe progs.
The moment they release I will switch. And I know many people that became more and more frustrated over Apples behavior in the last years.
So, yes, there are not enough users at present to make it worth wile for Adobe to release a linux version, but it is a risky move.
It might very well be that Apple, MS or both make mistakes that will initiate a quick migration to linux. We have seen on many examples how quick something like that can go. Particularly as most company server structures run on linux anyway. I bet they would gladly save the high costs for win or a hardware park from Apple.
The list of competitors to Adobe that died out of similar reasons is long.
In essence, it should not be underestimated how many people are on Win / Mac , unhappy with their present situation and are itching to switch to Linux..