[cw-discuss] Photoshop CS[23]?

[Derek Fountain]

> You make a clear statement to Adobe when you say that "the second
> machine will clearly be staying put on my desk for a while yet!"  What
> you are saying in business terms is that Adobe has no incentive to being
> part of the solution to running on CX or Linux because they will get
> payed by you regardless.
> 
> Given this issue isn't important enough to you to put any pressure on
> Adobe to be part of the solution and the fact you seem to expect nothing
> less than support for the latest version of PS shortly after it is
> released, I personally think CW's time could be better spent elsewhere.

Your post seems to be partly a rant at Adobe's business practise and
partly an attack on me. I'm not quite sure what to make of it.

I'm not here for the politics. My desk would be clearer if Photoshop
worked under Linux, but I'm not going to sabotage my business by
abandoning a peerless application which I depend on. And believe me,
Photoshop is peerless. I've been using Linux since '94 and GIMP since
about '98 and I know of what I speak: the only people who claim GIMP et
al are in any way a substitute for Photoshop are those who either have
limited requirements or have little idea of what Photoshop is.

As for "the fact you seem to expect nothing less than support for the
latest version of PS shortly after it is released," where did you get
that idea from? I don't expect anything. I just asked why Photoshop
doesn't work under Crossover.

>  Anyone willing to shell out $650 or more is probably more than happy to
> pay for Windows as well (if they haven't already).

Yes. Avoiding the Windows licence fee isn't the only reason for using
Crossover. It's certainly not the reason I use it.

> I predict there will be more people that would be willing to buy CX
> based on it supporting iTunes 7 or Windows Media Player 10 or 11 in the
> future than the number of PS CS3 users looking to run their expensive
> application in an configuration that Adobe provides no official support
> for.

Probably right, and that's why Crossover hasn't worked with the latest
Photoshop for nearly 4 years now. I don't question the business logic of
Codeweavers in choosing which applications they can get supported, and I
don't question Adobe's business logic in choosing which platforms to
support. I'm just a bit unfortunate in that my requirements don't
feature in the business logic of either of them.