As you say, Linux has been requested for years - Cloud on Linux https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1057800
My opinion (I don't work for Adobe) is If you must use Linux, you are going to have to use different programs
It seems we will need to find alternatives - but it makes me very angry at Adobe that I either need to change apps or change OS's for their whim.
I use Linux because I'm a front-end programmer. I'm also a web designer that need Adobe.
They have been ignoring the needs of the users for the long-term.
1 person found this helpful
I'd also like to add my vote for this oft-requested feature, and add some further clarification.
I am currently a subscriber to the full creative-cloud suite. I'm also a designer, a software engineer, and am often described as a "full stack" developer... Truly "full" stack given that I'll also work with UI/UX and artistic assets.
I use Linux, extensively, it would be my OS of choice for all seasons if not prevented by certain software not being available. Specifically CC, keynote and omnigraffle. So when I see official replies like this, it makes me want to weep:
Again, we've done the research. The profits aren't there -- very few Linux users are willing to pay for commercial software. And the cost of entry is still high because of the fragmented Linux landscape.
Because it's the wrong research. This isn't a request to make CC available to a new market of existing Linux users. It's a request to make it available on a better platform to existing, paying, CC subscribers. Many of us gave up on Windows long ago for various reasons, and macOS is just getting worse and worse with each new release. They're both poor choices for various reasons, and I'd happily give them both up if not otherwise tethered.
It feels like my hand is being forced by Adobe here, I'm being made to use a system I'd rather not. Sooner or later someone will produce Linux alternatives to the CC suite apps that I use that are good enough against a background of macOS becoming increasingly unbearable. When the pain of using an inferior OS outweighs the pain of using an inferior app. On that day I'll be jumping ship... simply because Adobe was so myopic as to obsess about a growth strategy without also considering what's needed to retain existing customers.
I wonder how many other existing, paying, users feel the same way? How many others are in the same boat (and potentially willing to jump from it)?
In the past, I put several studios I cooperated with, to go with the Adobe platform for the support on the heavier visuals we were producing. However, when we went further independent (building up for TV Series & Films), we remained on the security and stability of Linux, which is vital for projects of this state. Everything we once suffered with on OSX and crashed crazily on Windows, remained rock solid on Linux. Now we run everything on that OS.
More recently I worked with a director, who used OSX & his blood pressure was through the roof with crashes - while my alternatives (building content for him) suffered ZERO on my Linux stations.
For that reason, the stations we're working on have switched to BMD (BlackMagic)and they have now become the platform we started suggest to people and companies we work with. Guess what, some are already starting to listen.
Besides, there are unified architectures to handle the "fragmented" Linux region. They are called Snap Packs & App Images. The kernels and drivers are pretty much a point of reference for all distros out there. From there on, everything else is simply symbolic links and directory placements. For example, every application that runs on Ubuntu, I can use on Arch - or applications that run on Fedora can be transformed and installed on Ubuntu (using Alien for example).
Conclusively, once the application becomes available for one distribution, the rest of the community will make it available for the rest. So, even the "fragmented Linux landscape" does not stand as a case.
My guess would be that Adobe is happy with the marketing data they receive from Microsoft & Apple (who are essentially spying on the respective systems), to move toward a platform that is secure and stable.
Linux is the way. Like everything else, you have to research and learn how to do things to make it work. Even going as far as relearning new tools that happen to be free. For this reason, Windows and Mac will always win. Even if it's users face an onslaught of issues, they're simply too lazy to consider the alternative that is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
Win and Mac are losing it's edge. If you want simple plug and play with full support, you'll have to pay. If the OS is free, then you surrender your data in exchange. Windows 7 was the pinnacle of MS, being the most stable in my 30 years of experience. I think it's becoming hard for companies to find programmers with critical thinking skills. Many are retiring. The forums are rife with complaints about poor support, the things we've come to expect with paying. All support is nothing more than someone reading back a script. My experience has been good. However, it's a systems approach and I'm on the fence with Win 10.
Linux is supported by a massive community of critical thinkers. However, it doesn't always mean privacy or security. There is none. However, the software is dirt cheap or free, with little to no support. Thus the price is picking up a manual and a learning curve.