Live data from Hacker News

Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

chrome.blogspot.com

161–170 of 254 posts

Re: Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

#161
This is stupid. Latency (which can't be reduced below the speed of light without circumventing the laws of physics) is incredibly detrimental to drawing and digital painting, two of Photoshop's most popular use cases. A frame or two of lag really hurts responsiveness (a frequent concern when using a large brush on a slow PC), and network latency to nearby servers in the US starts at around 30ms and only gets worse. Client side prediction helps a lot in video games, but predicting a graphics editor basically entails having the entire editor, at which point the "cloud" is doing nothing but storing your files.

I will never understand why people are so obsessed with the extreme of the thin client ideal. They are a good choice in a world where the network is fast and low latency, while client devices are underpowered and expensive (VT100s in a lab with minicomputer in the next room). Meanwhile, we've lived for at least the past two decades in a world where the network (on the cellular and home broadband ends) is slow and high latency but our client devices are incredibly powerful and cheap. The period of time where this makes any sense for anyone except for proprietary software vendors that want to close off any possibility of pirating their products has long since passed.

The appeal of "compute clusters" for most "power user" tasks especially diminishes when you realize that shitty off-the-shelf PCs from 10+ years ago were perfectly capable of running programs that did most of same stuff as their modern versions. New functionality has been added, of course, but most of the increase in resource requirements came from selfish programming from generations of programmers that never learned how to optimize. There's no reason that a Chromebook with a cheapo ARM or low-end Intel SoC shouldn't be able to natively run a better optimized graphics program like Paint Tool Sai with CPU time/battery to spare.

Re: Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

#162
post #154

And this is the logical conclusion of the death of the 56K baud modem. There was a prophetic (if early) contest at Sun to 'imagine the future' and the winner got a SPARCStation. As a networking guy I tried to imagine what was going to change when the 'big yellow hose' (which is what 10MB Ethernet looked like at the time) came right into your living room. And one of the things that changed was that you could work at '…

[deleted]

Claiming that "terminals are the future once again" is hardly controversial. How much (time/money/mind share) are invested in non-networked, desktop-style apps? Some, yes, but "everyone" seem to be (continuing) the push for networked apps (MS Office and Exchange/Sharepoint, Google (everything), Adobe/Macromedia with Creative Cloud, Apple iCloud ...). Mozilla is doing a cloud-push to, but have thankfully so far had a very strong self-host, do-what-you-please story. Not sure about the Firefox OS, though -- will we be able to (easily) host our own app store? Back-end services? At least for now the things I use (Firefox sync) is easy and feasible to self-host.

The one thing I could see giving a resurgence to "off-line" for mainstream use, is latency -- more concretely -- the low latency tolerance of VR. But then again, as long as you can stream enough data/logic to the "terminal" -- even that shouldn't be a problem.

I do hope the industry can help shift things towards locally cacheable/locally hostable solutions, though. I'd much rather run some "cloud" office suite on my server, with the option of taking it with me off-line from time to time (and then perhaps sync up whenever I'm on-line) -- than having my data on a third-party server. Or servers.

I'm afraid the more likely future, is a future where a majority of users are locked-in to the whims of mega-corps -- and the scariest part of that, is that those that are leading in providing "cloud" services actually have a business model that centres around (ab)using the data, not charging for the services they provide.

Re: Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

#163

This is stupid. Latency (which can't be reduced below the speed of light without circumventing the laws of physics) is incredibly detrimental to drawing and digital painting, two of Photoshop's most popular use cases. A frame or two of lag really hurts responsiveness (a frequent concern when using a large brush on a slow PC), and network latency to nearby servers in the US starts at around 30ms and only gets worse. C…

Agreed. But only if that's how it's implemented (essentilly VNC to a centralized app). But if it runs code locally, then latency should be fine. I've not seen any details on what they're actually providing, so it's hard to tell what they're offering. I'd assume it's a continuation of their "creative cloud" offering, which as far as I know, caches the application code (and assets) locally?

Re: Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

#164
post #162
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

Claiming that "terminals are the future once again" is hardly controversial. How much (time/money/mind share) are invested in non-networked, desktop-style apps? Some, yes, but "everyone" seem to be (continuing) the push for networked apps (MS Office and Exchange/Sharepoint, Google (everything), Adobe/Macromedia with Creative Cloud, Apple iCloud ...). Mozilla is doing a cloud-push to, but have thankfully so far had a…

[deleted]

Re: Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

#165
post #163

This is stupid. Latency (which can't be reduced below the speed of light without circumventing the laws of physics) is incredibly detrimental to drawing and digital painting, two of Photoshop's most popular use cases. A frame or two of lag really hurts responsiveness (a frequent concern when using a large brush on a slow PC), and network latency to nearby servers in the US starts at around 30ms and only gets worse. C…

Agreed. But only if that's how it's implemented (essentilly VNC to a centralized app). But if it runs code locally, then latency should be fine. I've not seen any details on what they're actually providing, so it's hard to tell what they're offering. I'd assume it's a continuation of their "creative cloud" offering, which as far as I know, caches the application code (and assets) locally?

The article and comments ITT suggest that it is not like the existing "Creative Cloud", but instead works like VNC, or perhaps renders UI locally while doing all the actual image editing on a server. If it was all client code, there's no way it would run acceptably on cheapo Chromebooks (because Photoshop is a behemoth, mind, not because it's inherently impossible to edit graphics on a low-end device).

Re: Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh no. You see the reason personal computing exists is because it was people who wanted this level of control and "their own computer" started using these cheezy "calculator chips" to build their own computers. What they could do was a lot less than what the mainframes/minicomputers/workstations could do but you could own your own. All of those things are still true. But there is a rub. Today you can go on some warez…

Surely you must understand that the intersection of people that want to run graphical manipulation software and have the time and expertise to work on the GIMP codebase is rather small? Sure, the Steve Wozniaks of the world have always had the ability to write their own GIMP plugins or whatever, and you're right: that hasn't changed. But there were a few decades there where the rest of the world could actually own co…

Even so, in this scenario lots of people will discover that GIMP is good enough and so its popularity will rise, interoperability may become better and more people will take an interest in working on it.

Photoshop piracy was the worst thing that ever happened to the GIMP.

Re: Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not awesome at all. It's the death of personal computing. What to use Photoshop? Pay a perpetual monthly fee forever, with no control over which version of the software you are using. Adobe jacked up the price this year for the new version despite a lack of new features? Tough, nothing you can do about it. It's either pay up or lose access. The new version is buggy? Tough luck. Want to modify any of the software…

Why do you feel entitled to use proprietary software with no restrictions? Yes, Adobe and Microsoft are going to charge you rent. So what? Just use free (as in freedom) software instead. Adobe and Microsoft were never your friends, and if you feel bad about this recent development I don't know why you were using their software in the first place. They were always looking for a way to do this to you, all that's change…

> Why do you feel entitled to use proprietary software with no restrictions?

Because without laws regulating the sale of products to private citizens, we'd have chaos? So we need some protections to ensure the rights of users? Like the rights to re-sell used software (or media) etc.

Now, that said, without such reasonable rules in place, levelling the playing field, it's hard to fault companies for trying to give as little and charge as much as they can get away with.

If you buy a hammer, you have a lot of reasonable consumer protection. If you buy a laptop many of the same rules apply -- why shouldn't you have similar protections regarding software?

A hammer isn't going to cease working when the company that sold it goes out of business (or is bought up, or refocuses on a different market) -- why should your office suite? I'm not saying one should be guaranteed upgrades in perpetuity -- but the ability to install the same software on a reasonably similar configuration should be a no-brainer, really. Or be able to run it under an emulator.

But again, these things really needs to be legislated as consumer protection, so some company can't get away with not providing some of these freedoms.

Re: Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not awesome at all. It's the death of personal computing. What to use Photoshop? Pay a perpetual monthly fee forever, with no control over which version of the software you are using. Adobe jacked up the price this year for the new version despite a lack of new features? Tough, nothing you can do about it. It's either pay up or lose access. The new version is buggy? Tough luck. Want to modify any of the software…

Uh no. You see the reason personal computing exists is because it was people who wanted this level of control and "their own computer" started using these cheezy "calculator chips" to build their own computers. What they could do was a lot less than what the mainframes/minicomputers/workstations could do but you could own your own. All of those things are still true. But there is a rub. Today you can go on some warez…

> get a cracked Adobe CSx

- What about when Adobe makes a change when going CS2 => CS3 that I don't like, or that is detrimental to me? If I 'own a copy' I can just continue using it. With 'CS in the cloud' I have to upgrade because that's what Adobe wants.

- To step outside of software for a second, what happens when (e.g.) George Lucas decides that the "special edition" version of Star Wars is the 'real one' and replaces all cloud copies of Star Wars with the special edition version?

Re: Adobe joins the Chromebook party, starting with Photoshop

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but you then end up with two entirely divergent software ecosystems. As it stands two people, one of whom uses Linux/LibreOffice/GIMP and another who uses Windows/MS Office/Photoshop are able (bar some possible formatting issues) to share data and collaborate together because they can share files via dropbox or USB dongles. Once Photoshop and Office move entirely to the cloud there will no longer necessarily be…

That is true, and to the extent that those cloud applications don't use an open interchange standard you won't be able to share documents with them. Having lived through this from before[1], it isn't as dire as you might imagine. What happened last time is that it forced a lot of interchange formats. Will be interesting to see if it does that again. All of the market forces are still there, person A wants to send a d…

The difference here is that you actually had a copy of the data. If the vendor (e.g. Microsoft) decides to lock you in, they will keep the data in the cloud, with their app being the only access point. Then, locally you will only have a copy of "application state" at any point in time.
Post reply on HN