Adobe discontinues Premiere for Mac

Michael Wisniewski · July 8th, 2003, 02:09 AM

Adobe discontinues Premiere for Mac - Encore DVD is PC ONLY(click here)

Adrian Douglas · July 8th, 2003, 06:20 AM

The last paragraph pretty much sums it up. Adobe probably doesn't think it economically viable to compete with the Apple products.

As for M$ dropping Mac support with IE, that's no big loss as people were always complaining about it anyway.

K. Forman · July 8th, 2003, 08:43 AM

What disturbs me even more than Adobes lack of support for Mac, is their lack of support for anything other than XP. Mac has always had their own software/hardware list, and seemed to enjoy it that way.

PCs on the other hand, have been open to third party suppliers. This is good, in the fact that end users have a choice. It's bad, because there are too many variables, and not everything will work together.

In the case of OSs, newer isn't always the way to go, as there are always bugs and quirks, which never seem to be eliminated before the next newer, better OS is released. Support for software is dropped in favor of the newest OS, screwing those of us still waiting for our current OS to work right. Instead, we are expected to drop everything we learned about the old OS, and buy the newest release without a moments hesitation.

Michael Wisniewski · July 8th, 2003, 03:21 PM

I think it's good they're only supporting XP ... I hope that lets them focus their resources effectively and come out with an excellent new version as well as be able to provide the technical support that Premiere will need.

Having worked in several software companies, I know all to well the perils of trying to support multiple versions of the same program - you only end up squandering your best resources.

K. Forman · July 8th, 2003, 03:26 PM

I wouldn't have added support for Win95-98. Just the "Pro" versions of windows. XP is built on the NT kernal, right? So why not allow support for the numbers of people already using Win2K?
It's not that far from reasonable, is it?

Michael Wisniewski · July 8th, 2003, 04:01 PM

XP supports multimedia natively so I think they are banking on that to lower costs for development and tech support.

I think the line from Adobe will be, if you want to use an older version of Windows, you have to use the older version of Premiere.

Nigel Moore · July 9th, 2003, 02:59 AM

Quote:

I hope that lets them focus their resources effectively and come out with an excellent new version as well as be able to provide the technical support that Premiere will need

Although I agree with your sentiments, I cannot help but think that Adobe's technical support, with one or two notable exceptions, is conspicuous by its absence.

As, indeed, is its interest in what customers want.

Apparently, there were numerous complaints from beta testers about the dropping of A/B editing from Premiere Pro, but Adobe kept it dropped. Why, when this a function that so many use?

The beta testers appear to be happy though, because they get a free version of the final shipping product for their efforts. But the rest of us are expected to pay and adapt if we want to upgrade.

July 8th, 2003, 02:09 AM	#1
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Adobe discontinues Premiere for Mac - Encore is PC ONLY Adobe discontinues Premiere for Mac - Encore DVD is PC ONLY(click here) __________________ "Ultimately, the most extraordinary thing, in a frame, is a human being." - Martin Scorsese

July 8th, 2003, 06:20 AM	#2
Adrian Douglas Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Chigasaki, Japan. Posts: 1,660	The last paragraph pretty much sums it up. Adobe probably doesn't think it economically viable to compete with the Apple products. As for M$ dropping Mac support with IE, that's no big loss as people were always complaining about it anyway. __________________ Adrian DVInfo.net Search for quick answers Where to buy? From the best in the business...DVInfo.net sponsors

July 8th, 2003, 03:21 PM	#4
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	I think it's good they're only supporting XP ... I hope that lets them focus their resources effectively and come out with an excellent new version as well as be able to provide the technical support that Premiere will need. Having worked in several software companies, I know all to well the perils of trying to support multiple versions of the same program - you only end up squandering your best resources. __________________ "Ultimately, the most extraordinary thing, in a frame, is a human being." - Martin Scorsese

July 8th, 2003, 04:01 PM	#6
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	XP supports multimedia natively so I think they are banking on that to lower costs for development and tech support. I think the line from Adobe will be, if you want to use an older version of Windows, you have to use the older version of Premiere. __________________ "Ultimately, the most extraordinary thing, in a frame, is a human being." - Martin Scorsese

July 8th, 2003, 08:43 AM	#3
K. Forman Capt. Quirk Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Middle of the woods in Georgia Posts: 3,596	What disturbs me even more than Adobes lack of support for Mac, is their lack of support for anything other than XP. Mac has always had their own software/hardware list, and seemed to enjoy it that way. PCs on the other hand, have been open to third party suppliers. This is good, in the fact that end users have a choice. It's bad, because there are too many variables, and not everything will work together. In the case of OSs, newer isn't always the way to go, as there are always bugs and quirks, which never seem to be eliminated before the next newer, better OS is released. Support for software is dropped in favor of the newest OS, screwing those of us still waiting for our current OS to work right. Instead, we are expected to drop everything we learned about the old OS, and buy the newest release without a moments hesitation.

July 8th, 2003, 03:26 PM	#5
K. Forman Capt. Quirk Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Middle of the woods in Georgia Posts: 3,596	I wouldn't have added support for Win95-98. Just the "Pro" versions of windows. XP is built on the NT kernal, right? So why not allow support for the numbers of people already using Win2K? It's not that far from reasonable, is it?