An Open Letter to Steve Jobs
Dear Steve:
Congratulations on the 20th anniversary of the Macintosh. All of us in the creative community owe you and the Apple team a big “thank you” for giving us tools that aid creativity instead of hinder it. Apple’s recent success in the video and music areas has been satisfying to watch, knowing that it was here, in the page-layout world, that the Macintosh found its considerable voice.
I’d like to suggest that for a brief moment you take yourself back to those meetings at the Good Earth Restaurant in 1983 where you, Chuck Geschke and John Warnock hatched a plan that would completely change the page-layout and design industries. Your instincts and persuasiveness at that time altered Adobe’s direction and assured development of the software tools we have today. It must have been a lot of fun.
That Was Then
But that was 21 years ago, and it may seem like the graphic arts and publishing worlds have long been conquered. To some extent they have, and I can understand why you might find the topic of page-layout and image-creation pretty boring. But we need Apple now more than ever, and I am certain there’s financial opportunity still to be had.
Once Apple and Adobe firmly established PostScript as the standard, we all benefited from rapid tool development and huge capabilities gains. Everything that can be done in the graphic arts has been able to be done on a Mac with Adobe software for some time now. Yet there are still two huge missing elements — ease of use and simple integration. Those are what we need from you.
Adobe has delivered very capable, standards-setting tools over the years, and some developments, like Adobe Version Cue and the Creative Suite integration, hold promise. But quite frankly, as capable and reliable as Adobe’s tools are, they have become very complex and often get in the way of the creative process.
While Macromedia’s efforts have been stellar, their products don’t integrate well with the printed-page. And the Web and print documents really are starting to converge. The trading of graphic elements, data, and text from print to the Web is ramping up to full swing.
Plus it looks like Quark will be out of the game soon, so even though they had some of the right ideas, they may finally get their “come-uppance.” Except for Tim Gill’s first accomplishments, Quark’s timing and execution have been poor.
This Is Now
So here’s what I’m asking: Can’t you look back a little bit, and see that it’s too early to cede the world of print- and Web-page creation to Adobe and Macromedia? There’s room for a series of consumer-to-professional applications from Apple that handle page-layout, image-editing, and maybe even paint and drawing (still got MacDraw around?).
We need you to do for us what you did for the video and film world when you put together a brilliant acquisition strategy, combined it with your understanding of good user interfaces, tied performance to your best machines, offered several entry points but never under-delivered, then won over the market from well-established leaders.
It looks like you’re taking the music industry by storm now too. Great stuff. Way to go. We never doubted it. But it’s making us a little jealous here in 2D land, where we “got it” first. Kind of like watching Michael Dell dance, if you know what I mean.
The good news is, I don’t think this would be too hard to accomplish. There are plenty of lesser-known, very capable programs out there, like Stone Studio, Arcsoft’s PhotoStudioX (which Apple bundles on some machines now), and Ragtime — even Ready, Set, Go! is still around. Heck, you might even be able to pick up Corel for a song — they have some pretty good technology, and I know Apple would design better-looking boxes.
And of course we all fantasize about Apple ripping Quark away from Fred Ebrahimi and turning XPress into the product everyone wants it to be. But that probably won’t make financial sense until long past Quark’s relevancy. It’s pretty much Adobe’s game now in anything related to the print and electronic page, and Macromedia’s on the Web side. The only way to win is to take advantage of your ability to deliver easier-to-use products that are well integrated with your other software and hardware products. And provide a clear upgrade path from beginner to professional.
I’m sure you and many others at Apple have imagined an iPages program that connects to your iPhoto library, your iMovie library, and your iTunes library so you can create interactive PDF documents to send to your friends and family.
Now take that concept up to the Pages Pro level (which we know Apple can do) and you’ll win the hearts and minds of a jaded high-end user base. And for everyone in between, there’s always Pages Plus, the capable ‘tweener program you’ll develop.
Youth First
If you don’t care about us electronic elders, think about the next-generation of graphic designers. There’s no upgrade path on our side of the creative coin. It’s not fair to make new designers jump headfirst into Photoshop, InDesign, or Dreamweaver. And what’s going to turn on an even younger generation to the idea of page creation and illustration?
iMovie and now Garage Band will inspire many kids to take different creative paths with their lives. We need that same dynamic in every part of the creative disciplines, including static and interactive page design.
But what about Windows users? There are more and more of them in the page-creation disciplines. I think you’ll agree with me in saying, “Well, what about them?” There’s nothing wrong with one segment of a market making strides over another segment because of a choice of work tools. I’m sure there are plenty of examples out there in the video production field where users switched to Macs just to be able to use Final Cut Pro. What’s wrong with that?
And not to sound any alarms, Steve, but one of the problems Apple faces right now in the core graphic-arts market is that all of the main tools work fine in Windows. I.T. and purchasing managers are starting to wonder why they can’t once and for all squish those last few Mac users like so many bugs. Not all of your fans actually cut the checks.
My point is, if Apple made some great software tools for graphic artists, you’d not only hang on to a loyal base of customers, but I think win back quite a few. Especially now that the G5 has gotten everyone’s adrenaline pumping. And a lot of people are on the fence right now, waiting for the whole InDesign vs. Quark thing to reach its bloody conclusion.
Creativity Rules
So help us out here. We’re family, after all. And we need you now as much as we did back when Linotype and Scitex were fighting over who could charge the most for their proprietary composition systems. But I know Adobe is family, too, even though you’re at odds with those guys at times. So I’m sure it must be hard to figure this one out.
Designers, page-layout artists, illustrators, photographers, writers, and editors all need to get back to the creative process. We’re tired, if not a little bored, by the whole production thing. Many of us will be very happy to pledge lifelong allegiance to Apple if you give us what we need. Heck, a kick-in-the-pants like that might even give Adobe a boost in the end.
Thanks. I’ve tried to find out if Apple is already considering such a move, but your team is way too tight lipped, so we’ll just wait and wonder, like always!
Sincerely,
Gene Gable
Read more more Gene Gable.
 |
Gene, most of the tools are already there — You’re just looking in the wrong places. I suggest you look at all of the freebies rolled into Windows NT5.1, err, XP.<br><B>
Oops!</b> The very things you’re asking Steve to do, MS tried… <i>and got pilloried by the courts and (especially E.U.) regulators.</i><br>
For example, I used GraphicConverter on the Mac to grind up my digital photos. In XP, all I have to do is select View -> Slideshow, and I have the same thing.<br>
MS has the right idea in their NT6 (“Blackcomb”?) offering in development now, by literally making the whole OS one giant database. In other words, what Canto’s Cumulus is to image files, NT6 will be for data, text, images, sound, video, etc… Because NT is based upon (err, “developed” by Dave Cutler) OpenVMS – WHich is a mainframe OS, it’ll work pretty much as planned.<br>
Dan Schwartz,<br>
Cherry Hill, NJ
I agree with your comments whole-heartedly.
I started using Macs for desktop publishing way back when with PageMaker 1.0 on a dinky 512K Mac and imaging to a Linotype (on RC paper for paste-up). I would hate to see Apple abandon us true believers in the publishing industry. Macs have made my life truly easier and I was excited with the introduction of PDF workflow then the the release of Adobe InDesign. Now, it seems publishing has been put by the wayside in favor of iPods and Steven Spielberg wanna-bes.
I hope Steve Jobs will listen to you…
I have to agree with the vast majority of what Gene says here, he usually hits the nail on the head. I agree that no one makes an “entry level” page layout program, and maybe just maybe Apple could take that on. It may irritate Adobe, but I think Gene has the evangelist thing going on in him and he’s looking for assistance in his mission.
Apple may just help him out. If you would have told us 5 years ago that Apple would develop it’s own competitor to Premiere, I think a lot of people wouldn’t believe you. If Apple goes down this path, they maybe should emulate (or purchase) Deneba’s Canvas, a Swiss army knife type of product. It would combine the capabilities of an InDesign, Illustrator and Photoshop all in one package. That ought to fulfill the needs and desires of any neophyte graphic designers.
We have to inspire the next generation, and somebody has to develop the tools. Apple could gain a lot from this.
I can remember the first preview presentation of MacOSX. They have shown a vector illustrator app witch could render the object realtime: scaling, rotating, distorting was not a problem. It was cool, intuitive just how the iApps works. Now I have to teach an older friend to Illustrator 10. He’s a beginner he asks a lot and pretty confused by the many menu. Sometimes I just can’t explain why seems some things logical for me, and actually the truth is that they are usually not logical at all.
It is a bad idea for Apple to begin head on competition with Adobe (and others) in the application software arena. Adobe’s Premium Creative Suite already takes away ANY need for an overpriced Apple machine. You can now do great print graphics on less expensive Windows Machines with great ease. More and more software developers WILL recommend, and look to Windows as the platform of choice if Apple begins increased competition with the software developers. Aspects of Adobe have already recommended a PC as the computer of choice. Apple’s market share is so small that I think they are better off making things like mini iPods first and software and computers second. I made the switch to Windows two years ago and have never had the need to look back with regret (I also saved boat loads of money). At one time the need for an Apple machine was shinny but I think that shine has somewhat dulled. Apples shine will disappear if it begins direct competition with major software developers. I think Apple will get its teeth kicked in to their core if they follow this articles direction. Just my opinion.
ever. To much abuse crappy upgrades from Adobe makes me sick. Even now the new packages is not really a upgrade but more a you use Indesign now. Come on Apple make some graphic apps that flow in X that can help the average home business grow in more production with a ease of use and low over head for apps that tend to be crap.
While in principal I agree with your article, unfortunately principal does not always win out in the real world.
First, I was disappointed with Steve’s keynote and the general direction Apple seems to be taking. They are becoming more of a consumer entertainment company and less of a high end innovator. Of course that is where the money is, but that is also where the competition is.
As a designer who started with the original mac 20 years ago, I am disappointed with the lack of pro innovation. Sure the G5 and OS X are great, but I will tell you something to look out for: now that Adobe and Macromedia are in the “suite” mode, what happens if they offer cross-platform upgrades? So for the same upgrade price you get the same (or better) software, and you upgrade your computer by buying a PC for less than a new Mac would cost.
Peripherals, etc. would all work (maybe better.) Fonts could be an issue – perhaps there is a way to use Mac fonts in Windows.
If Adobe and Macromedia did this, you could see a version of the original Mac TV commercial – with all of the Apple pro users tramping over to Windows.
I would hate to see that happen, but I think it’s inevitable. As print and web merge, for example, we designers grow tired of working on a platform with a tiny market share and slipping support from all parties.
Wonder how Apple’s market share looks for the past five years if you exclude all of the non-pro components?
-ddog
Gene,
I usually agree with you, but I fear that by telling Apple to create software that goes up against Adobe and Macromedia, you are doing the end-user a disservice.
Apple has, in its Final Cut Pro product, created a very dangerous situation. The software that most people prefer for video editing runs only on one operating system and only one one type of computer — Apple Macintosh boxes.
Remember back in the sixties, Gene, when publishing products only ran on proprietary machines? That was what Steve and Chuck and John and Tim and their buddies were rebelling against. Those overpriced, proprietary systems made typography and design outside the range of ordinary users.
I fear that every time Apple creates a Final Cut product that conquers all the competition, it also sends that competition over to the Windows side. And that makes the Apple product the winner but at the expense of giving the user a choice of software.
Just before the recent Expo I read rumours of Apple coming out with a product to go head-to-head with Microsoft Office, specifically Word. Or an Apple product to go up against Adobe Photoshop.
If either of those were to happen, it would be the worst thing for the Macintosh OS. How quickly can you say “Adobe Photoshop for Windows Only” or how does “No more Microsoft Office for Macintosh” sound?
As it is, the Apple OS is suffering from a lack of software or features in software. Take a look at the extensions and plug-ins and extras for Flash. Most of the really cool ones are Windows only. Because most of the developers found it easier to write for only one platform that has most of their users.
Same thing has happened with Acrobat products, office productivity software, high-end server software, and low-end games. Steve may boast of how many applications were written for OS X, but it is NOT a growing market.
And every time Apple creates a set of products like iLife, that essentially underprices themselves to cut the competition, they drive developers away from the Mac.
Oh sure, iPhoto WAS free. But it’s not any more. But what it did do was keep Apple users from ever seeing how cool Photoshop Album was and how it integrated with Acrobat and Photoshop.
I’m sad at the direction Apple is taking. And don’t want you pushing them harder along the path.
I’m a window’s user, I really could care less what Apple does, but if you go head to head with Photoshop your gonna lose! I think what you were trying to say was, “Gee, wouldn’t it be wonderful if Apple controlled the world and I was right!”, haha, you have got to be kidding, Steve Jobs has an ego that will one day sink his little ship. If Adobe was to drop Apple, Steve’s little ship would sink right along with it….yea, great idea Gene, let Apple go head to head with Adobe and see what happens!! hahahahahaha, ROTFL!
[Reformatted, revised and extended from my earlier remarks.]
In reply to another post, OpenType is the cross-platform solution to typeface portability. What OpenType actually does is provide a “container” that holds either a PostScript® Type 1 or TrueType typeface, along with kerning and metrics data, all in a single fork file. Remember, the actual Bezier data and metrics in both PS1 & TT are the same: It’s simply the file format is different for Win, Mac, and *nix.
[By the way, I’m the founder & moderator of the Mac-NT Mailing List, which will be five years old this April]
Now, back to my revised remarks…
Gene, most of the tools are already there — You’re just looking in the wrong places. I suggest you look at all of the freebies rolled into Windows NT5.1, err, XP.
Oops!
The very things you’re asking Steve to do, MS tried… and got pilloried by the courts and (especially E.U.) regulators.
For example, I used GraphicConverter on the Mac to grind up my digital photos. In XP, all I have to do is select View -> Slideshow, and I have the same thing.
MS has the right idea in their NT6 product line offering in development now, by literally making the whole OS one giant database. In other words, what Canto’s Cumulus is to image files, NT6 will be for data, text, images, sound, video, etc… Because NT is based upon (err, “developed” by ex-DIGIT Dave Cutler) OpenVMS — Which is a robust mainframe OS powering the banking & ATM machine industries — it’ll work pretty much as planned.
Dan Schwartz,
Cherry Hill, NJ
Thanks to everyone for the insightful responses, especially those from Windows users, whose perspective I sometimes overlook.
Those critical suggest that Apple entering the page-layout/image-editing market would ultimately lead to fewer choices. I don’t really see this, however, and detect a certain irony in the argument that if Apple enters the market it means Adobe may exit the Mac market. So is it better to only have one choice, than to let the market decide?
And even if you carry this idea to its most extreme conclusion, is there anything wrong with a world where the choice is Adobe on Windows or Apple on the Mac? If the standards are open (which they are), and Apple does a better job of implementing system-level PDF, PostScript, font handling, etc., then what difference does it make? Basic business communications (email, Web surfing, word processing, etc.) are easily cross-platform these days, and if Apple does this right, a graphics professional would need very few other tools. If a company determines the Mac market isn’t worth innovating for, then Apple will have to step up and fill the gap.
I don’t want an Apple dominent world, but at 2% market share, I see Apple as the intelligent alternative, not as some control-hungry company bent on driving companies like Adobe out of business. The reason Apple is thought of as “arrogant” is because they refuse to accept the limits that large market share creates. The iPod is grossly over-priced, uses non-compatible technology, has limited distribution, and never goes on sale–that is precisely why it is better. Apple wasn’t limited by designing something that had to compete with Windows commodity music players. I don’t want a product that compares to Photoshop or InDesign, I want products that are substantially better.
Professionals will choose the set of products that serve them best. But to suggest that Photoshop and other leading products are not vulnerable is risky. The success of Adobe products has as much to do with marketing muscle, timing, and distribution strategies as it does with innovation. Remember, Adobe aquired Photoshop, PageMaker, GoLive, and other products.
As a strong advocate of market choice, I see Apple’s innovation in software as the only hope that I will still be able to choose a Mac well into the future. If all the Mac becomes is a platform on which to run Adobe and Microsoft products, then we are admitting that our industry should be limited by the popularity of Windows.
Please, Apple, keep doing whatever you need to do so I can continue to choose a Mac. I know I could do my work almost as well in Windows, but I can’t forget that had it not been for Apple, we would not have near the innovation in graphics software that we have today. For that I’m willing to be pretty loyal, even if I could save a few hundred bucks on a Dell machine to run Photoshop. God help me if these critics are right and that becomes my only choice!
GG
Apple’s emphasis on consumer-oriented products and programs is right on. It allows them to continue to pour money into their other core market…graphics, which does not have the same mass market as the iPod and iLife. I wonder if expanding to more pro-products might alienate some of the major vendors like Adobe, Macromedia, and Microsoft who sometimes have a shaky relationship with Apple anyway. Premiere went away because Apple released a better program: Final Cut Pro. Certainly it could compete with other products if it put its mind to it, but with that move what Apple was doing was grabbing back market share that used to be theirs in the first place. I’m not sure that a more efficient Photoshop could make users switch platforms, but for something as time-consuming as video, it was a bit more obvious.
As for the other comments about programs that need competition (particularly web products), let’s remember that the web industry is still pretty young, that there are already 2 major competitors in Adobe and Macromedia, and the industry as a whole hasn’t had the opportunity to mature the way the print industry has done. Is that not to say Apple couldn’t help this move along faster? Maybe. But my guess is any web program to come out from Apple will be consumer-oriented (a re-tooled HomePage). Uhh.
Seems to me Apple doesn’t have to create all new “entry level” apps from scratch. Just acquire some that are already out there, such as EazyDraw for graphics, and Freeway Express for web design. It was mentioned earlier that Ready Set Go! is still out there on the page layout side, but despite the fact that Pagemaker is considered “clinically dead” for all intents and purposes, perhaps Apple could cut a deal with Adobe to acquire the code and dress it up for a new “iPage” app – that collaboration would keep Apple in good graces with Adobe, as the upgrade path would be very clear.
Is this argumeent never going to die?
Let’s face it kids, Big BiLL and Adobe have got this corner of the market tied up-and don’t let’s forget that BG owns a slice of Apple pie!
But so what? It’s not what you’ve got but what you do with it that counts.
XP works fine, it’s stable( mostly- if you discount all the hotfixes!) and Adobe products work well on it.
MacOS Xxx works beautifully, the products are fine, and work gets done. Horses for courses.
Frankly, choice is a beautiful thing. I doubt Big Bad Bill is shivering in his shoes. I doubt Adobe are panicking either.
But what influences choice? Not the wishful thinking of a minute number of pros who have a pathological addiction to a given platform or the app-of-the-day. You build a user base by bringing in new blood at the ground floor, by getting Apple in at the entry level.
Back in the 80’s, the Mac was the box-of-choice for schools here in NZ. Then Apple lost the plot and decided to stroke we high-end users. And the IBM-compatible( note the irony in the title?)took the centre -ground.
Frankly Mac priced itself out of contention. And no amount of killer apps will adjust the perception that Macs are overpriced-except by making them competitive on the street. Nice to see that this is finally beginnig to happen.Learn on a Mac, you’ll probably stay.Learn on a PC, why would you want to make the effort to cross platforms?
A further thought… Apple is not the gunslinger that will keep the bigboys honest..It’s a kid with a plastic-chrome-plated BB gun! The sheriff is Linux and all that wonderful opensource software. Anybody heard of Mozilla(way ahead of Safari and IE6), OpenOffice, the GIMP or Scribus. All of it free, and Mac-able. That’s what we should be supporting.
Rather than Steve Jobs, it’s Linus Torvalds we should be enshrining!
apple could care less about graphics users. they’re onto business and entertainment. pc never did give a hoot about graphics. we artists are the only ones who care about graphics. that’s why we find work arounds on applications that suck. we are creative. we are imaginitive enough to create amazing options. business just doesn’t value our input. they think us strange. as i have always maintained, “$#%! business!” we’ll keep doing it our way. damn the corporations. artists will survive and someday when the boys in blue, or whatever drab colour of the day exists, are bored with their sterile surroundings, the business boys might open their eyes and actually see another world out here that they never even knew existed beyond copy and paste. iPod. what a toy! adobe, you lose. the rest of you can take a hike. put that in your Mac and smoke it!
regards
patient in poppy
Explaining my need for the G5, (just purchased) was for a” graphic’s” thing. Colleagues say, “I can do that on my Dell!” My argument of, ” I think it’s easier on a Mac”, is not that convincing! We don’t stand out any more, so why go for the “unique” machine when the rest of the world is using something else.
As the new year begins, the print design department is again set to defend its stake in Apple work stations. However, every year the argument to keep the Macs gets harder and harder to justify. Since all of our web work is done in Windows, the print work is the only process produced entirely on Macs. The editorial department is already publishing small runs of collateral material directly from PC Word or from InDesign. With OpenType available and the ability to open legacy Quark documents in InDesign, the bean counters see no benefit to keeping the Macs. Unless Apple shores up its stake in print production, I think the days of the Mac department here in my company are numbered. We lost our only Mac technician from IT at the beginning of the year and his position has been eliminated. Having Apple develop proprietary applications for print will only tip the scales more in Windows’ favor.
Adobe does everything that I need to do and more. Yes there’s a Windows version of Photoshop, but PCs are such pains to use! I know they are because I always keep one around for those thjings that you just can’t do on a MAC. I wish the rest of the world would get a clue and ” Think Different” for a change.