I wonder if Microsoft is thinking the same thing. Either as a defensive move to make sure Photoshop will always work on Windows or as an offensive move and making Photoshop and friends windows only in an attempt to strangle the OS X platform.
Apple has been able to create pro level software for both audio and video editing industries. If Adobe/Microsoft scraped its mac line of products, I bet Apple would have a competing product out in 12 months that graphic designers would flock to.
Note, however, that those were all originally acquisitions. FCP was born at Macromedia and Apple purchased the product and hired the team. Shake came from the Nothing Real acquisition. Logic is from the Emagic acquisition.
You're correct in a general sense, but for the specific case of designers working in fields where the standard computer is a Windows machine I've almost always seen an exception made for the design department to use Macs.
I assume that Microsoft is making some money on Office for Mac. They aren't developing that product for charity. I don't see any reason for them to kill off development for the Mac, especially if they acquire Adobe.
Microsoft could use some help in the mobile market, though, so I can believe the idea of those two companies joining forces to make some headway there.
Vendor lock-in isn't as crucial to Adobe's CS as it is to Office. Microsoft doesn't want anybody to even think that there's such a thing as an "Office alternative", whereas recent years have proven that upstart competitors to components of CS can get traction.
So, while killing CS for Mac might work (users switching platforms might outnumber users switching programs), killing Office for Mac would just force universities to switch to ODF and in the long term, it would hurt the rest of Office's markets.
IMHO that would be a catastrophe for Apple: the existence of MS Office being the only reason Mac OS X (and not Linux) is an accepted alternative for employees inside many companies (including at Adobe btw).
Sorry, but CS is niche software used by certain professionals. MS Office / Exchange are used by everybody else ;)
And I wouldn't bet against Microsoft for providing an alternative to CS: judging from the experience of using Microsoft Blend, they are rookies, but they can manage it.
I don't know how Apple would feel about having to deal with all those enterprise customers who run Adobe software on PCs only. Also, a number of Adobe products don't have Mac versions, like ColdFusion and JRun. Yes, there are still places that rely on this software.
Helpful to whom? of all the devs I've ever met that have used CF, the most positive thing I've ever heard said about it is that "they're used to its failings and it's comfortable". I can't help but think Microsoft's tools are a much more appealing value proposition than Adobe's in this particular space.
What's "CS"? Unless it's Outlook's calendaring, I doubt it will have any effect on "the enterprise". Remember, most people only use their computers to send email, setup meetings, and browse Facebook.
Correct, but a large chunk of corporations have in house creative departments and many(if not most) use macs. Killing the Mac version of CS would force them to switch back to PC.
It might be harder than you think to replace highly refined creative tools such as Illustrator or Photoshop.
Although they have become rather bloated and the last few versions have failed to innovate in significant ways, there is a lot of graphics professionals who would be very reluctant to waste all that hard-won muscle-memory.
Plus there's a lot of work-flow knowledge in them there apps.
I agree that replacing Illustrator and Photoshop are nontrivial. I doubt that a typical startup could do it.
On the other hand, it would be a natural fit for someone like Autodesk given their resources and markets. Retail box graphics applications could make sense in Microsoft's product line. Even Corel would be in a position to capitalize on Adobe leaving the Windows market.