# LrC & Ps porting to ARM and x86 for Big Sur



## mcasan (Jun 30, 2020)

I sure hope Adobe is porting LrC and Ps to both ARM and x86 on Big Sur.     One app version for both platforms would be great.   Apple said they were working with Adobe, but no details.   Lets hope for the best for the fall releases.


----------



## clee01l (Jun 30, 2020)

I expect Apple will continue to upgrade MacOS until. they sunset the x86 systems.    Just like Windows and Mac now, Adobe will continue to compile different versions for Win x86, Macx86 and now ARM.    My only concern is that LrC might get discontinued as Lightroom (cloudy) already has an ARM version.


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Jun 30, 2020)

It won't get discontinued because of the switch. The future of Lightroom classic does not depend on ARM or Intel processors at Apple, but on us. As long as there are lots of photographers who use Lightroom Classic, Adobe will not discontinue it.


----------



## clee01l (Jun 30, 2020)

Johan Elzenga said:


> It won't get discontinued because of the switch. The future of Lightroom classic does not depend on ARM or Intel processors at Apple, but on us. As long as there are lots of photographers who use Lightroom Classic, Adobe will not discontinue it.


Compiling an ARM version of LrC will require considerable resources from Adobe. Where As  the cloudy version  already has an ARM compile.

I hope you are right.


----------



## mcasan (Jun 30, 2020)

Apple said they are already working with Adobe and Microsoft on the migration.    If we get Big Sur and some ARM Macs this fall, I can not believe that all parties would not want Adobe to have LrC and Ps running in native mode on ARM based Macs.     So I would guess by end of September _the fat lady will have sung_.....and we will know how well Adobe Photography Plan pays out on in Big Sur country.


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Jun 30, 2020)

clee01l said:


> Compiling an ARM version of LrC will require considerable resources from Adobe.


You conclude this from what info? Not info from Apple, who say: "With everything built into Xcode 12, such as native compilers, editors, and debugging tools, most developers will be able to get their apps running in a matter of days." Apple announces Mac transition to Apple silicon


----------



## clee01l (Jun 30, 2020)

Johan Elzenga said:


> You conclude this from what info? Not info from Apple, who say: "With everything built into Xcode 12, such as native compilers, editors, and debugging tools, most developers will be able to get their apps running in a matter of days." Apple announces Mac transition to Apple silicon



I spent my second and third incarnations as a computer programmer. Writing C++ code that compiles on Windows or Apple requires different programming skill sets and different programmers. Adobe already needs to use separate programming teams for x86 Windows and for x86 Mac. They probably have separate teams for Lightroom Cloudy on iOS and Android. If you notice the functionality between iOS and Android often differs or lags behind. 

Since I was a C++ programmer, there have been considerable strides in developing “write once/compile everywhere” programming suites. But there has never been a really universal compiler. Apple C++ APIs are not plug compatible with Microsoft’s C++ APIs. So, programmers need to tweak the C++ code for the different platforms. Apple will need to port their API to ARM and there might be incompatibilities between the two Apple API versions. 

It is never as simple as flipping a switch. I think C++ is still used as the programming language although Apple has introduced “Swift” and Microsoft “Rust” as object oriented successors to C++. Two different programming languages create by two very different software companies. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Conrad Chavez (Jun 30, 2020)

Based on past Mac platform transitions, I’d guess that Cletus’s take on it is probably closest to reality. “Just push a button and recompile” works great for Mac-only developers who write simpler applications that stick closely to Apple guidelines and make heavy use of Apple APIs. But Adobe is different.

Traditionally, Adobe has sort of operated its own “graphics OS” independent of Mac or Windows. Many Adobe applications don’t use the standard macOS text composition engine, window engine, graphics engine, etc. especially where Adobe thinks theirs works better, has more features, or works for them cross-platform. For example, for color management in Photoshop, the default system is the Adobe Color Engine, not Apple ColorSync.

In addition, Adobe applications use an increasing number of associated processes for all that cloud stuff, like licensing validation processes, sync processes, processes for cloud-supplied content integrated with applications such as tutorial videos and templates, maps, and so on.

All of that extra and proprietary stuff potentially creates a lot more “edge cases” than a Mac developer who uses straight Mac APIs (Core Graphics, Core Image, Core Text, etc.) for everything. All incompatible components, including those developed outside the control of the Lightroom team, must also be upgraded and made compatible, otherwise you get a situation like we have with Lightroom 6 where the app itself runs on Catalina, but the deal-breaking incompatibilities have to do with its mandatory components that come along for the ride, like the incompatible installer.

Historically, it means Adobe applications cannot be assumed to be a simple push-button recompile. But sometimes Adobe beats the competition, like when InDesign gained market share by transitioning from Classic Mac OS to Mac OS X to Intel long before QuarkXPress did. After that, though, XPress made the PowerPC-to-Intel CPU transition 7 months before InDesign did, according to Wikipedia.

For Lightroom Classic, which has 13 years of constantly changing Adobe requirements built into the code base, all of that means we users can’t really predict how quickly it will make it to ARM, and are going to have to wait and see.


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Jun 30, 2020)

OK, I understand, but how is that different for Photoshop and Lightroom desktop? AFAIK, during the presentation those two applications were already demonstrated running natively. And Photoshop is 25 years old. If Adobe could do that so quickly, then I don't see why doing it for Lightroom Classic would be such an undertaking that they would rather not port it at all and risk losing 50% of their Lightroom Classic customers.


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Jun 30, 2020)

clee01l said:


> Since I was a C++ programmer, there have been considerable strides in developing “write once/compile everywhere” programming suites. But there has never been a really universal compiler.


Ain't it the truth. I use to work for Digital Equipment and when we first brought out the Alpha chip, I spent a lot of time showing customer the benefits of the speed of the chip. This involved using a compiler with multiple levels of optimization against the underlying core capabilities.  Sometimes it was not trivial (technical term).

At another company, we started on Windows and then when customers wanted UNIX, we cheated by using a library that emulated Windows calls on UNIX. This was for commercial software so not as intense as some of the processing requirements I can only imagine are required for Adobe products.


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Jun 30, 2020)

Personally, it does not help Apple if popular large software vendors cannot run on the new ARM processor. It will be bad for business.

That being said, I can see the danger of EOL issues with both Apple and software vendors if they decide to drop Intel support in x years. That to me is the big unknown.


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Jul 1, 2020)

Yes, I think that the biggest risk is that Adobe stops supporting the Mac Intel version after a certain time and at a moment that many people still use Intel Macs, not that they will not introduce a Mac ARM version. That wouldn’t mean the old version won’t run on the newest Macs (Rosetta 2 takes care of that), but there wouldn’t be any more updates. I do not see that happening for at least a few years, however.


----------



## clee01l (Jul 1, 2020)

Johan Elzenga said:


> OK, I understand, but how is that different for Photoshop and Lightroom desktop? AFAIK, during the presentation those two applications were already demonstrated running natively. And Photoshop is 25 years old. If Adobe could do that so quickly, then I don't see why doing it for Lightroom Classic would be such an undertaking that they would rather not port it at all and risk losing 50% of their Lightroom Classic customers.


Not everyone is going to go out and buy a new ARM Mac.  And Big Sur seems destined to run on x86 Macs for a while.


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Jul 1, 2020)

clee01l said:


> Not everyone is going to go out and buy a new ARM Mac.  And Big Sur seems destined to run on x86 Macs for a while.


Yes, that is what I said. I think the biggest risk for Mac users is not that Adobe would discontinue Lightroom Classic, or not make an ARM version of Lightroom Classic. The biggest risk is that Adobe discontinues the Intel version one day, and that this is a day when you still use an Intel Mac and have no desire to buy a new computer. I don't see that happen soon, but it may happen one day.


----------



## clee01l (Jul 1, 2020)

Johan Elzenga said:


> Yes, that is what I said. I think the biggest risk for Mac users is not that Adobe would discontinue Lightroom Classic, or not make an ARM version of Lightroom Classic. The biggest risk is that Adobe discontinues the Intel version one day, and that this is a day when you still use an Intel Mac and have no desire to buy a new computer. I don't see that happen soon, but it may happen one day.


Apple typically sunsets Hardware after 5 or more years after production ceases.  There would be no incentive for Adobe to continue product updates after that time.


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Jul 1, 2020)

clee01l said:


> Apple typically sunsets Hardware after 5 or more years after production ceases.  There would be no incentive for Adobe to continue product updates after that time.


Yes, that is indeed the kind of time frame I'm expecting.


----------



## mcasan (Jul 1, 2020)

That is also the rough timeframe when Hackentoshes will  rapidly die off.    Several of the Hackentosh wizards have said no problem for the next 5-7 years provided the OpenCore team and others continue to work..   After that....best be planning to do Apple Silicon.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Jul 16, 2020)

Official Response: 


> The team is working on a native version of Lightroom Classic for Apple Silicon, and it will be released next year. We're also committed to continuing support for Intel-based Macs.


----------

