6 ms·

I suspect this move is due to behind the scenes Adobe / Apple relations souring over the years. Adobe used to be one of their biggest supporters and helped win

I suspect this move is due to behind the scenes Adobe / Apple relations souring over the years. Adobe used to be one of their biggest supporters and helped winning over users to the Mac platform. This has diverged significantly over the years, and I think Apple is looking at Adobe and their business model and realizing that it both lucrative for them to have software that fills into this market to round out their creative pro apps suite and that Adobe increasingly becoming aggressive with cost / licensing and tactics to extract revenue aren't good for their ecosystem. That's my working theory, at least.

ChadNauseam 2y ago
Creative software and macbooks are complement goods. i.e., demand for macbooks goes up when creative software gets cheaper, and vice versa. This is a case where mergers are expected to make prices go down. As opposed for substitute goods, like macbooks and dell laptops, where a merger would probably make prices go up. In both cases you have a prisoner's dilemma between vendors - with vendors producing substitute goods, the "defect" option is to lower your price. (This makes you more money, but costs the other vendor more money than you made.) For substitute goods, the "defect" option is to raise your price (this makes you more money, but costs the other vendor more money than you made.) So mergers of vendors of substitute goods are usually bad, and tend to be blocked, because once merged the companies can coordinate to raise prices. But of complement goods are usually good, and tend to not be blocked, because once merged the companies can coordinate to lower prices. All this to say that I think this move makes sense for apple regardless of whether their relationship with Adobe has soured.
- smilespray 2y ago
  > demand for macbooks goes up when creative software gets cheaper Is this something you just made up, or does this really happen? Colour me sceptical.
  - plufz 2y ago
    I mean theoretically that makes sense? If you get more value for something it increases the chance of buying it? But I also have no idea if this statement is true.
  - dash2 2y ago
    It would probably be easier to test the other way round: demand for creative software goes up when macs get cheaper.
  - brookst 2y ago
    It’s a reframing of vertical integration, which does lead to lower prices or higher value assuming reasonable competition. You can also think of it as disintermediation (“cutting out the middleman”).
  - raincole 2y ago
    Complementary good is a widely accepted economic concept. Of course, theories and the reality don't always match up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementary_good https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementary_good
  - Nevermark 2y ago
    Demand for X goes up when prices for X go down. First day of Econ 101. If X consists of two complementary components, A and B, then if the price for either A or B goes down, then the total price for X goes down, demand for X goes up. Which means demand for A and B went up. Even if the price of only one of A or B went down. So if the price of A goes down, demand for B goes up. If software prices go down, then demand for the hardware to run that software on goes up.
strangemonad 2y ago
If that’s the case, why not just buy Affinity
- kstrauser 2y ago
  Maybe Canva doesn't want to sell.
  - catgirlinspace 2y ago
    how is canva related to affinity?
    - cianmm 2y ago
      Canva owns Affinity as of March https://www.canva.com/newsroom/news/affinity/ https://www.canva.com/newsroom/news/affinity/
      - philistine 2y ago
        You know, Apple buying might have more to do with Canva buying Affinity than anything Adobe related.
croshan 2y ago
In general, the way a walled garden wins is by providing everything its villagers need inside. And Apple’s products seem to create walled gardens in order to prioritize [first creative, then economic] control. Based on the demographic that a significant portion of their marketing seems targeted towards (artists and creative types), I think your theory sounds likely.
looping__lui 2y ago
… didn’t Apple switch away from Nvidia, push for OpenCL and keep Adobe in the rain when their new release was all super optimized for Nvidia? And I think heavily push for their proprietary video and image editing software? But Adobe rewrote its codebase and had the better product after all. And that was 15+ years ago? One article from back in 2010: https://nofilmschool.com/2010/07/apple-snubs-adobe-again-with-new-mac-pros https://nofilmschool.com/2010/07/apple-snubs-adobe-again-wit...
- seec 2y ago
  Yes they did. But any fact that would paint Apple in a bad light will be silenced here. The truth is that no matter how good of a player Adobe would be, Apple would still be trying to fuck them over because Apple's greed is infinite. Adobe's switch to subscription pricing is very annoying, but at least it's not completely absurd compared to what you would pay previously if you bought the software outright and if you actually subscribe to the full package, you get much more value actually. And their competitors, while decent, are not really a replacement for professional work. Affinity is fine and all but after having used it a bit for a few projects, if I were to do it full time professionally, I would pay for Creative Cloud. In comparison the extortionate pricing Apple practices on their RAM/storage upgrades is much worse.
TheKarateKid 2y ago
I don't think so. Mac sales have only grown and the whole "you need a Mac for creative work" hasn't been a thing since the 00's. I think this is more about having the team put advanced photo editing features into the native Photos app, and possibly contributing to AI image processing.
- dividedbyzero 2y ago
  There are lots of amateur photographers out there that use Apple hardware yet so far Apple only monetizes storage. I wouldn't be surprised to see a subscription offering that includes pro tier features for Photos.app good enough to replace Lightroom for enthusiasts but not for actual professionals.
  - matwood 2y ago
    Exactly. I want a LR feature like editor that integrates fully with Apple Photos.
    - agos 2y ago
      That already existed, it was exactly the Photomator that got acquired. Let’s hope it stays alive
      - TheKarateKid 2y ago
        99% chance it will not stay alive for more than 1-2 years. Shazam is the only Apple acquisition I know of that still exists independently, and that's only because it promotes Apple Music on Android. Most likely will be integrated into Photos or possibly even a new advanced photo editing app for macOS/iOS only.
        seec 2y ago
        Since they were already Apple hardware only apps, there is a good chance not much will change about it (at least in the near term) and they will just use it as a tool to increase the desirability of their hardware, just like they do for their iWork suite. I don't think it bodes well for the long term though, because Apple tend to not care much about stuff that don't make them a ton of money. It will probably become like their office apps, being updated at a glacial pace, used primarily as a marketing tool but never really reaching a level that would truly make them a worthwhile competitor.
ChuckMcM 2y ago
Not to mention Apple's challenge with 30% AppStore tax for subscription revenue. My guess was that Apple is okay with Apps from third parties that tithe 1/3 of their subscription revenue but aren't willing to make a place for them if they don't "sing for their supper" as my Grandfather used to say.
- fhdsgbbcaA 2y ago
  On the flip side, Vision Pro has no apps and it may not be the biggest reason for its failure, but it’s a contributor that I don’t see changing. Apple’s main source of innovation is applying mafia tactics to software distribution.
  - musicale 2y ago
    > Apple’s main source of innovation is applying mafia tactics to software distribution. Main source of innovation? What about the Mac, iMac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple watch, AirPods and M1 MacBook Air, all of which transformed their product categories? Not just because of the hardware, but also because of the hardware-software integration. Even Apple's failed innovations (Apple Vision, etc.) are interesting products that push the envelope.
    - simonh 2y ago
      Yes, but Apple has always been ahead on technology compared to everyone else, so that doesn’t count anymore. Or something.
    - hnlmorg 2y ago
      I don’t think you’re reading the GPs point very charitably. They’re clearly talking about recent innovations that generate revenue. Also I think you’re overreacting with some of your examples there. You seem to be conflating “successful” with “innovative”. The two terms aren’t mutually inclusive.
  - brookst 2y ago
    As a software developer who made good money reaching hundreds of thousands of people through the app store where the old “put up a website and buy advertising” model might have netted me single-digit thousands of sales, I am always surprised at the white knights telling me I got no value from paying 30% of revenue. If the app store is “mafia tactics”, I can’t even imagine how demonic things like wholesalers mist be.
soneil 2y ago
Are there any signs of this souring? During the PPC-Intel transition, Adobe compatibility was almost a running joke. Along the lines of the infamous "You can always count on [..] to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the other possibilities] quote. I was surprised at how quickly Adobe adopted aarch - it didn't feel sour.
- wtallis 2y ago
  My recollection is that Adobe was slow to migrate from 32-bit to 64-bit x86 because they were still dependent on many of the Carbon APIs (Mac OS 9 compatibility) and those APIs weren't carried over to 64-bit. They dragged their heels about transitioning to Cocoa (NeXT derived) APIs for their UI, and it showed.
  - WillAdams 2y ago
    It still kills me that Altsys/Aldus/Macromedia let their NeXT codebase for Altsys Virtuoso whither (v2 was essentially Freehand 4 w/ a couple of unfixed bugs) so that when Rhapsody was announced they weren't ready for it. In some other timeline, I am using a Mac w/ a current version of Macromedia Freehand running on Rhapsody and I am a _much_ happier person. As it is, I'm about to give up on interactive vector drawing and just code everything either using METAPOST or OpenSCAD, or some mix of both.
princearthur 2y ago
Assuming you're right, the vertical platform vendors should consider having a public Sherlocking policy. If you're anywhere near Apple's stuff, the Pixelmator outcome is a large fraction of your upside. Much larger than it should be for the ecosystem's sake. Excessive cannibalism isn't probably in Apple's interest even.
ezst 2y ago
Bet Apple eyes at the rent that Adobe extracts out of all those subscriptions and wants the same thing for itself. Apple has been in the market of renting out content for decades (starting with iTunes) and this move means people will have less options, not more.
- matwood 2y ago
  Bingo. Uncommon for a company Apple's size, but they are trying to Innovators Dilemma Adobe. Either by releasing a pro version of Photos.app or adding pro features to Photos they will continue to move up the value chain into Adobes market of LR/PS. Adobe charges $20/month for the LR/PS bundle. If Apple can add some of the prosumer functionality and say increase Apple One by $5, they shift some of the subscription revenue over to them.
Tommix11 2y ago
Apple and Adobe have always had a sour relationship. Adobe's crappy font licensing led to truetype and they're crappy implementation of Flash led to Jobs dropping flash in the iPhone just to mention a few things from their history.
- steve1977 2y ago
  OTOH they’ve used Display PostScript and PDF as their display systems for NeXTSTEP and Mac OS X.
  - rdsnsca 2y ago
    Only MacOS Server 1.o used display postscript, every version since has use Quartz or Quartz Extreme ( also know as Display PDF).
- the_lucifer 2y ago
  Not to mention the fact that there were tons of rumors around Apple developers practically handholding adobe to get them across the finish line for the Apple Silicon port. Adobe is extremely incompetent wrt actually developing usable, clean and efficient software so I can definitely see this as being plausible
- tonyedgecombe 2y ago
  Apple was an early investor in Adobe.

ChadNauseam 2y ago

Creative software and macbooks are complement goods. i.e., demand for macbooks goes up when creative software gets cheaper, and vice versa. This is a case where mergers are expected to make prices go down. As opposed for substitute goods, like macbooks and dell laptops, where a merger would probably make prices go up. In both cases you have a prisoner's dilemma between vendors - with vendors producing substitute goods, the "defect" option is to lower your price. (This makes you more money, but costs the other vendor more money than you made.) For substitute goods, the "defect" option is to raise your price (this makes you more money, but costs the other vendor more money than you made.) So mergers of vendors of substitute goods are usually bad, and tend to be blocked, because once merged the companies can coordinate to raise prices. But of complement goods are usually good, and tend to not be blocked, because once merged the companies can coordinate to lower prices. All this to say that I think this move makes sense for apple regardless of whether their relationship with Adobe has soured.

smilespray 2y ago
> demand for macbooks goes up when creative software gets cheaper Is this something you just made up, or does this really happen? Colour me sceptical.
- plufz 2y ago
  I mean theoretically that makes sense? If you get more value for something it increases the chance of buying it? But I also have no idea if this statement is true.
- dash2 2y ago
  It would probably be easier to test the other way round: demand for creative software goes up when macs get cheaper.
- brookst 2y ago
  It’s a reframing of vertical integration, which does lead to lower prices or higher value assuming reasonable competition. You can also think of it as disintermediation (“cutting out the middleman”).
- raincole 2y ago
  Complementary good is a widely accepted economic concept. Of course, theories and the reality don't always match up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementary_good https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementary_good
- Nevermark 2y ago
  Demand for X goes up when prices for X go down. First day of Econ 101. If X consists of two complementary components, A and B, then if the price for either A or B goes down, then the total price for X goes down, demand for X goes up. Which means demand for A and B went up. Even if the price of only one of A or B went down. So if the price of A goes down, demand for B goes up. If software prices go down, then demand for the hardware to run that software on goes up.

strangemonad 2y ago

If that’s the case, why not just buy Affinity

kstrauser 2y ago
Maybe Canva doesn't want to sell.
- catgirlinspace 2y ago
  how is canva related to affinity?
  - cianmm 2y ago
    Canva owns Affinity as of March https://www.canva.com/newsroom/news/affinity/ https://www.canva.com/newsroom/news/affinity/
    - philistine 2y ago
      You know, Apple buying might have more to do with Canva buying Affinity than anything Adobe related.

croshan 2y ago

In general, the way a walled garden wins is by providing everything its villagers need inside. And Apple’s products seem to create walled gardens in order to prioritize [first creative, then economic] control. Based on the demographic that a significant portion of their marketing seems targeted towards (artists and creative types), I think your theory sounds likely.

looping__lui 2y ago

… didn’t Apple switch away from Nvidia, push for OpenCL and keep Adobe in the rain when their new release was all super optimized for Nvidia? And I think heavily push for their proprietary video and image editing software? But Adobe rewrote its codebase and had the better product after all. And that was 15+ years ago? One article from back in 2010: https://nofilmschool.com/2010/07/apple-snubs-adobe-again-with-new-mac-pros https://nofilmschool.com/2010/07/apple-snubs-adobe-again-wit...

seec 2y ago
Yes they did. But any fact that would paint Apple in a bad light will be silenced here. The truth is that no matter how good of a player Adobe would be, Apple would still be trying to fuck them over because Apple's greed is infinite. Adobe's switch to subscription pricing is very annoying, but at least it's not completely absurd compared to what you would pay previously if you bought the software outright and if you actually subscribe to the full package, you get much more value actually. And their competitors, while decent, are not really a replacement for professional work. Affinity is fine and all but after having used it a bit for a few projects, if I were to do it full time professionally, I would pay for Creative Cloud. In comparison the extortionate pricing Apple practices on their RAM/storage upgrades is much worse.

TheKarateKid 2y ago

I don't think so. Mac sales have only grown and the whole "you need a Mac for creative work" hasn't been a thing since the 00's. I think this is more about having the team put advanced photo editing features into the native Photos app, and possibly contributing to AI image processing.

dividedbyzero 2y ago
There are lots of amateur photographers out there that use Apple hardware yet so far Apple only monetizes storage. I wouldn't be surprised to see a subscription offering that includes pro tier features for Photos.app good enough to replace Lightroom for enthusiasts but not for actual professionals.
- matwood 2y ago
  Exactly. I want a LR feature like editor that integrates fully with Apple Photos.
  - agos 2y ago
    That already existed, it was exactly the Photomator that got acquired. Let’s hope it stays alive
    - TheKarateKid 2y ago
      99% chance it will not stay alive for more than 1-2 years. Shazam is the only Apple acquisition I know of that still exists independently, and that's only because it promotes Apple Music on Android. Most likely will be integrated into Photos or possibly even a new advanced photo editing app for macOS/iOS only.
      - seec 2y ago
        Since they were already Apple hardware only apps, there is a good chance not much will change about it (at least in the near term) and they will just use it as a tool to increase the desirability of their hardware, just like they do for their iWork suite. I don't think it bodes well for the long term though, because Apple tend to not care much about stuff that don't make them a ton of money. It will probably become like their office apps, being updated at a glacial pace, used primarily as a marketing tool but never really reaching a level that would truly make them a worthwhile competitor.

ChuckMcM 2y ago

Not to mention Apple's challenge with 30% AppStore tax for subscription revenue. My guess was that Apple is okay with Apps from third parties that tithe 1/3 of their subscription revenue but aren't willing to make a place for them if they don't "sing for their supper" as my Grandfather used to say.

fhdsgbbcaA 2y ago
On the flip side, Vision Pro has no apps and it may not be the biggest reason for its failure, but it’s a contributor that I don’t see changing. Apple’s main source of innovation is applying mafia tactics to software distribution.
- musicale 2y ago
  > Apple’s main source of innovation is applying mafia tactics to software distribution. Main source of innovation? What about the Mac, iMac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple watch, AirPods and M1 MacBook Air, all of which transformed their product categories? Not just because of the hardware, but also because of the hardware-software integration. Even Apple's failed innovations (Apple Vision, etc.) are interesting products that push the envelope.
  - simonh 2y ago
    Yes, but Apple has always been ahead on technology compared to everyone else, so that doesn’t count anymore. Or something.
  - hnlmorg 2y ago
    I don’t think you’re reading the GPs point very charitably. They’re clearly talking about recent innovations that generate revenue. Also I think you’re overreacting with some of your examples there. You seem to be conflating “successful” with “innovative”. The two terms aren’t mutually inclusive.
- brookst 2y ago
  As a software developer who made good money reaching hundreds of thousands of people through the app store where the old “put up a website and buy advertising” model might have netted me single-digit thousands of sales, I am always surprised at the white knights telling me I got no value from paying 30% of revenue. If the app store is “mafia tactics”, I can’t even imagine how demonic things like wholesalers mist be.

soneil 2y ago

Are there any signs of this souring? During the PPC-Intel transition, Adobe compatibility was almost a running joke. Along the lines of the infamous "You can always count on [..] to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the other possibilities] quote. I was surprised at how quickly Adobe adopted aarch - it didn't feel sour.

wtallis 2y ago
My recollection is that Adobe was slow to migrate from 32-bit to 64-bit x86 because they were still dependent on many of the Carbon APIs (Mac OS 9 compatibility) and those APIs weren't carried over to 64-bit. They dragged their heels about transitioning to Cocoa (NeXT derived) APIs for their UI, and it showed.
- WillAdams 2y ago
  It still kills me that Altsys/Aldus/Macromedia let their NeXT codebase for Altsys Virtuoso whither (v2 was essentially Freehand 4 w/ a couple of unfixed bugs) so that when Rhapsody was announced they weren't ready for it. In some other timeline, I am using a Mac w/ a current version of Macromedia Freehand running on Rhapsody and I am a _much_ happier person. As it is, I'm about to give up on interactive vector drawing and just code everything either using METAPOST or OpenSCAD, or some mix of both.

princearthur 2y ago

Assuming you're right, the vertical platform vendors should consider having a public Sherlocking policy. If you're anywhere near Apple's stuff, the Pixelmator outcome is a large fraction of your upside. Much larger than it should be for the ecosystem's sake. Excessive cannibalism isn't probably in Apple's interest even.

ezst 2y ago

Bet Apple eyes at the rent that Adobe extracts out of all those subscriptions and wants the same thing for itself. Apple has been in the market of renting out content for decades (starting with iTunes) and this move means people will have less options, not more.

matwood 2y ago
Bingo. Uncommon for a company Apple's size, but they are trying to Innovators Dilemma Adobe. Either by releasing a pro version of Photos.app or adding pro features to Photos they will continue to move up the value chain into Adobes market of LR/PS. Adobe charges $20/month for the LR/PS bundle. If Apple can add some of the prosumer functionality and say increase Apple One by $5, they shift some of the subscription revenue over to them.

Tommix11 2y ago

Apple and Adobe have always had a sour relationship. Adobe's crappy font licensing led to truetype and they're crappy implementation of Flash led to Jobs dropping flash in the iPhone just to mention a few things from their history.

steve1977 2y ago
OTOH they’ve used Display PostScript and PDF as their display systems for NeXTSTEP and Mac OS X.
- rdsnsca 2y ago
  Only MacOS Server 1.o used display postscript, every version since has use Quartz or Quartz Extreme ( also know as Display PDF).
the_lucifer 2y ago
Not to mention the fact that there were tons of rumors around Apple developers practically handholding adobe to get them across the finish line for the Apple Silicon port. Adobe is extremely incompetent wrt actually developing usable, clean and efficient software so I can definitely see this as being plausible
tonyedgecombe 2y ago
Apple was an early investor in Adobe.