The Online Photographer

Check out our new site at!

Thursday, March 01, 2007

Photoshop To Go Online

Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen (right) says that Photoshop will be online within six months, c|net reported yesterday. Up till now, Adobe's products have been software programs sold in boxes or by download for installation on end-user's own local computers. The pioneering application for the new paradigm is Adobe Remix, a web-based video editing tool that Adobe offers through PhotoBucket, and Adobe's model appears to be Google, which already offers several online applications (such as Blogger, which you're reading right now). Adobe wants to be ready before anyone else (Google again implied) treads on its territory with online apps for imaging. Chizen told yesterday that a basic version of Photoshop will be made available as an online service. It will be a more basic version than Elements and it will be free to users—Adobe will derive income indirectly, through advertisements.

Chizen said that in the future, Adobe will offer complete hosted applications online, and that it is also looking into hybrid models in which online services will introduce users to its more complete, traditionally packaged software.

Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON, with thanks to Kevin


Blogger Alan Klughammer said...

I am not sure how well this would work. I am thinking of bandwidth issues and server load. It will be interesting to see how it pans out.

10:21 AM  
Blogger thechrisproject said...

I think I can sum up what everyone will say about this here:

What about huge files?
No serious photographer will use this.
This is for kids and non-serious users.
GIMP did this 7 years ago.
I'll never use it.

I don't think this is aimed at us. Yet. I do think it has really exciting possibilities in a lot of areas, though, for both consumers and businesses.

10:33 AM  
Blogger Ken Tanaka said...

"Today's Magic Wand tool sponsored by Magic Chef!"

Err, no thanks.

Actually this surprises me a bit. Desktop applications rendered as online services have not fared well at all. But perhaps Adobe sees something in its crystal ball.

11:04 AM  
Blogger J said...

Good news indeed in my view. As you say, strong defensive move against the likes of Google as well as pushing Adobe into the whole world of social networking, Web 2.0 (a term that's already out of favour) etc. I was only thinking last night, as I installed Lightroom 1.0, that I'd love an on-line, Adobe-hosted back-end library storage mechanism plugged in here with auto synching between my home machines/laptop and a master DB somewhere. Hell, I'd even pay money for it! They'd be way better at protecting my images than I could ever be, and could also offer soem powerful DB management capabilities that, frankly, I can't justify setting up on my little home network.

11:23 AM  
Blogger Bruce M said...

"Adobe wants to be ready before anyone else (Google again implied) treads on its territory with online apps for imaging."

There are people out there providing image editing on the web.

The site below has an article on this service compared to other services.

1:39 PM  
Blogger Del Bomberger said...

I think you might be a month early, or at least I wish that were the case. As an April fool's day joke, I could appreciate it more.

1:43 PM  
Blogger chuk said...

I think, people are dismissing this before knowing how it will be implemented.

Comparing it to GIMP 7 years ago.. come on!?!

This is Adobe, the application will likely be built using flash/flex and will run in your browser using the flash runtime. Ie, your CPU will do the work & bandwidth will be limited to pulling down the application the first time or any online storage offered.

3:34 AM  
Blogger thechrisproject said...

Ken - there have been plenty of Desktop apps that have fared amazingly well. Remember when email used to be desktop app only? Feed readers more recently have followed suit. I work for a company that writes online digital asset management apps for large corporations, so I'm a little biased, but to say that nothing has fared well at all is a little disingenuous.

11:59 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home