"Let's say it takes another year until their Soundbooth is ready, how many of the people who do sound stuff at a level where GarageBand doesn't cut it won't have Intel Macs by then?"
I think that is a dangerous assumtion to make. Many Mac users that I know (myself included) can't go out and buy a brand new Intel-based Mac simply because the money isn't there. For many of us, buying used has always been the way to go and until some of those Intel-based machines start hitting the used Mac channels, PowerPC is what we use as it still works and functions great.
I think I read somewhere that only about 30% of total Mac users have actually made the jump to the new machines. If that number is correct, in a years time that number could've increased to 60% or 70% barring no more problems hardware wise. But that STILL leaves a good 40% or so that are still using PowerPC and to assume that these users out there should not have the opportunity to use the software is a bad thing. I agree with Scott: This does send a really bad message to users and other developers for the Mac.
I hate to say it, but as large companies go, Microsoft provides the best example of how to develop software for two different platforms as a large company. Yes, their Mac offerings always ship 6 to 8 months after their Windows-centric counterparts, but at least Microsoft can say that they have a dedicated team of developers that insures that their Mac-centric products fit into what users feel a Mac-centric application should be.
Adobe however doesn't see things this way. Their developers seek to write code one time that works everywhere and that's not always the best course of action to take. As of late, while their applications work, they often seem bloated and out of place in context to the other applications that are finding space in my Applications folder as of late. I say that if Adobe no longer cares about properly making software that fits the Mac like it's supposed to, get out of the way and let some other promising company step in.......
by Frank 'viperteq' Young — Oct 30
I think that is a dangerous assumtion to make. Many Mac users that I know (myself included) can't go out and buy a brand new Intel-based Mac simply because the money isn't there. For many of us, buying used has always been the way to go and until some of those Intel-based machines start hitting the used Mac channels, PowerPC is what we use as it still works and functions great.
I think I read somewhere that only about 30% of total Mac users have actually made the jump to the new machines. If that number is correct, in a years time that number could've increased to 60% or 70% barring no more problems hardware wise. But that STILL leaves a good 40% or so that are still using PowerPC and to assume that these users out there should not have the opportunity to use the software is a bad thing. I agree with Scott: This does send a really bad message to users and other developers for the Mac.
I hate to say it, but as large companies go, Microsoft provides the best example of how to develop software for two different platforms as a large company. Yes, their Mac offerings always ship 6 to 8 months after their Windows-centric counterparts, but at least Microsoft can say that they have a dedicated team of developers that insures that their Mac-centric products fit into what users feel a Mac-centric application should be.
Adobe however doesn't see things this way. Their developers seek to write code one time that works everywhere and that's not always the best course of action to take. As of late, while their applications work, they often seem bloated and out of place in context to the other applications that are finding space in my Applications folder as of late. I say that if Adobe no longer cares about properly making software that fits the Mac like it's supposed to, get out of the way and let some other promising company step in.......