1. Here's the announcement from Adobe on when/how their software will be made universally available. It appears we must wait until CS3 for any intel support. I would have appreciated a swift update of CS2 as well but will now put off buying new machines for my office and home until the new software is out. I've been using macs for nearly 20 years and am not considering switching to a windows machine simply because I have to wait for some software. I use Adobe CS regularly on my iBook and new iMac G5 and really enjoy it. I am very much looking forward to having CS3 run on a MacBook Pro.

http://www.adobe.com/products/pdfs/intelmacsupport.pdf

Posted at 5:52PM on Feb 16th 2006 by Nathan Pierce

2. Here's the announcement from Adobe on when/how their software will be made universally available. It appears we must wait until CS3 for any intel support. I would have appreciated a swift update of CS2 as well but will now put off buying new machines for my office and home until the new software is out. I've been using macs for nearly 20 years and am not considering switching to a windows machine simply because I have to wait for some software. I use Adobe CS regularly on my iBook and new iMac G5 and really enjoy it. I am very much looking forward to having CS3 run on a MacBook Pro.

http://www.adobe.com/products/pdfs/intelmacsupport.pdf

Posted at 5:52PM on Feb 16th 2006 by Nathan Pierce

3. Having just purchased a sweet new DSLR I've been considering getting a Mac based computer, preferrably a laptop and the new Intel based ones sounded really interesting. This will definetly affect that decision.

Posted at 11:13AM on Jan 19th 2006 by Kyle Heon

4. I would think its understandable. I don't know how Adobe's process works but It might take a lot of man hours to optimize the entire Adobe suite to the intel platform. Factor in the fact they have all their key players probably working on CS3 and you got a potential for sub par optimization IF they were release an intel version of CS2 'just to get it out there'.

And it's worth noting that Apple probably had a bit of a heads up on the intel development and intel switch in comparision to Adobe, it only makes sense that they could be one of the firsts to get an intel version out.

Posted at 11:30AM on Jan 19th 2006 by Malfoy Roark

5. This highlights one of the biggest problems with the Macromedia-Adobe merger. Macromedia made Freehand the first OS X native design program, but with a complete monopoly on design apps, Adobe has much less motivation to move fast.

For the first time in five years, I'm rooting for Quark instead of against them, if only for competition's sake.

Posted at 12:22PM on Jan 19th 2006 by Dusty

6. Taking a long time to offer a native version hurt Quark and I am sure that Adobe knows this and will not make the same mistake. I think we will see a downloadable update that will make at least the main application an universal one. We may have to wait for a full version upgrade to see many of the filters updated though.

Posted at 12:49PM on Jan 19th 2006 by Twist

7. Twist: it's funny that you bring up Quark, because at last week's Macworld where these new Macs were announced, Steve Jobs also mentioned that Quark has an Intel-based beta available. Sounds like they were on top of their game this time around.

As far as I've heard, Adobe hasn't issued any kind of statement about an version of CS for Intel. Kind of odd, in my opinion.

Posted at 1:24PM on Jan 19th 2006 by David Chartier

8. Okay, I'm sorry—and I say this about Apple too—but why should I have to pay 50 dollars for an upgrade to the Universal versions of a programme when I've already paid hundreds to thousands of dollars for the software already in the first place?

I'm fine with a 5 dollar S&H fee to get the CD to me, but 50 dollars? It's ridiculous.

Posted at 1:48PM on Jan 19th 2006 by Kakaze

9. Kakaze: I agree, $50 is outlandish. I was just happy to see at least some sort of upgrade program from Apple, as it's sounding more and more like Adobe might force Intel-Mac users to fork out serious $$ for an Intel-native CS.

Posted at 2:59PM on Jan 19th 2006 by David Chartier

10. I don't like the merger of adobe and macromedia as it can only spell more incidents like this one, at the end of the day adobe is always looking at the bottom line and only moving when it needs to. Now there are no clear strong rivals that can take it on in the interactive or digital print industries adobe can afford to make upgrades ask for charges what ever it feels as they hold many of the cards.

A good example of this happening in the past is quark being slow to adopt osx opening the door for indesign, and another more main stream example being internet explorer once it dominated the market the speed of development slowed as quickly as it began.

Adobe don't treat your customers this way you are a powerful rich software company that can still make a profit and keep your customers happy at the sametime and that doesn't mean a crazy $50 charge.

Posted at 7:11PM on Jan 19th 2006 by Stefan Burt

11. Adobe know that Photoshop is critical to the acceptance of Intel Macs. They may well be holding this over Apple's heads in an attempt to get Apple to stop biting into the Adobe product line. They can't like the Pro media apps or Apple's new raw camera image software.

Posted at 3:47PM on Jan 20th 2006 by McGroarty

12. I place the odds of Adobe releasing an interim version of Photoshop CS2 (or any of the CS2 apps) that is Universal at 0 (zero) simply because the SDK from which developers create their Photoshop plug-ins is CodeWarrior-based and *not* Intel-compatible. Adobe wouldn't dream of releasing their flagship product without the support of their developer community. Wait for an updated Universal SDK and then add 8-months to that. FWIW, Adobe released CS2 eighteen months after CS1, but with the move to Intel processors I'd guess that two years is more reasonable (e.g., April 2007). Again, wait for a Universal SDK before speculating about a release date for a Universal build of any CS app.

Posted at 4:24PM on Jan 20th 2006 by caleb

13. I had guessed that the greatest about of redevelopment would be required for hand-tuned assembly sections in filters and in the apps themselves.

Now, if Adobe's codebases were mostly unified across platforms, then it would be easy to re-use the back-end stuffs' hand-tuned x86 assembly from the Windows versions, and then porting effort would be limited to whatever bits are left in the user interface code on the front end.

But I had forgotten that apps like Photoshop have a whole filter plug-in API to port and third-party plug-in developers to deal with. It's a big hurdle on its own for them to ship a new Xcode-targeted API and get developers up to speed on it, if that hasn't been in the works already. And as far as I know, there is no way to use Rosetta to run PowerPC code segments inside an otherwise native process; this is why OS X packages of Java apps like Eclipse and Azureus are incompatible - the PowerPC-native JNI sections won't run from Apple's native intel Java). So it's up to Adobe to develop some hackish workaround for running PowerPC plugins in a separate process, or to break it to developers that their PowerPC plugins aren't going to work on Intel Macs. That's definitely not a quick or easy process.

Posted at 4:14PM on Jan 24th 2006 by rakslice

14. Y'all're crazy. I recently bought a new (well, refurb) G5 2.3 Dual because I knew it would be some time before Adobe released a version of CS compatible with the Intel chips. Remember how long it took 'em to be compatible with OS X? And that was just a software upgrade.

Also, there are no Intel-based towers. I wouldn't expect any Adobe update until the professional workstations are out. Laptops and iMacs aren't what the bulk of Adobe's customers use.

Although the new iMac allows an extra monitor to be connected. I would have bought a G5 iMac if it would accept another monitor. Hm.

Posted at 4:54PM on Jan 28th 2006 by Brian

15. FWIW, Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen in August indicated the Macintel version of CS won't happen until CS3 is ready to release: "I'd be surprised if we did a MacTel only release. I think you'll find us doing what we did with OS X, which is to enhance the product and support the new environment at the same time. If you look at our product cycles for products like Photoshop and Creative Suite, they tend to be in the 18- to 24-month cycle, which means that you're talking about either Q4 of '06 or Q1 of '07."
http://news.com.com/Chizen+on+Apple+MacTel+switch+not+easy/2100-1046_3-5844899.html

Posted at 10:24PM on Jan 30th 2006 by Jeff Campbell