Adobe actually did extensive market study regarding a PS Linux port. The conclusion was that there is basically zero demand for a PAID Photoshop. People do want PS on Linux,but they want a FREE version (sudo apt-get install photoshop)
I would love to read more about that study.
Sure, but your customers will resent you for it and search for alternatives. Vendor lock-in is not a good long term strategy. Competition will eventually catch up.
> If you don't, you'll probably not pay for it anyway.
This is speculation on your part.
I think it would come down to convenience - even if it was still paid software, having it as an apt/yum/whatever repository and either having it prompt for licensing / seek out a FlexLM server / etc. on launch would be great for linux users. Even better if if you could just apt-get install adobe-cs (or whatever it's called now) as a metapackage and let it pull in photoshop et al. as individual subpackages that could be updated independently instead of massive multi-gig monolith packages.
> 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.
> The Linux world has to change before commercial software will have reason to invest in Linux ports.
> And we haven't seen much real change in the Linux market in several years.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160321232350/https://forums.ad...
Edit notice: I completely overwrote the initial version of this comment, which said I couldn't find these posts, because I realized I was using the wrong search time terms and found what parent mentioned.
That said, if I had to make an assumption about Adobe's perspective, I'd assume that the position of many linux users that desktop software shouldn't require a recurring subscription was (and is) the main obstacle from Adobe's perspective, not distribution.