What is Digg?42 Comments
- SPARTACVS, on 10/12/2007, -5/+41Man I can't wait to torrent this *****.
(I'm kidding, but I'm just trying to make the point that half the people who say they have CS2 didn't pay a dime for it.) - caliform, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25I am sure you will do a great deal better, rewriting performace-vital parts of this million-lines of code counting project on your own.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25Adobe should have written it prooperly to begin with. Lazy and sloppy coding brought on from a lack of competition and need to innovate or improve performace (throw more RAM at it!)
- gwalbridge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Have you ever, ever, EVER, installed the Creative Suite package? It takes hundreds of megabytes.
I'll repeat. Hundreds. Imagine how many lines of code they have to port/modify, beta test, and debug...
And now you see why this is a fairly rapid upgrade process. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14As a design professional, I have to say that I hope their main improvement in the Creative Suite is INTEGRATION. Flash Studio, PS, AI should work as similarly as possible without obfuscating objective. Same shortcuts, copy/paste functionality, etc.
From a programming perspective this software is amazing. If they never touched it again I'd still shake the hands of the dudes that wrote it. - gwalbridge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12@KrocCamen -- I have to sorta-kinda agree with you. I've worked very closely with Adobe and, primarily, their plug-in developers for years now. It was only a few years ago that they removed all of their 68k code from their product line, as when Apple moved from 68k to PPC Adobe simply wrote a wrapper for the old code. I believe this was done around, or shortly after, the time when they wrote a Cocoa wrapper for their Carbon versions of the apps. As you can see, they've made a bit of a mess along the way with all these "band-aid fixes," and now they've got to clean it up a fair amount to prepare it for the universal binary transition. Uggh. Glad I'm not working at Adobe.
- spectre_25gt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Fireworks has no place in the professional content creation business.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6FTA: "Photoshop CS3, code-named "Red Pill," is just one of several graphics and content creation applications due as part of CS3 in the spring of 2007. The new software suite will also combine software technologies from Macromedia Corp., which Adobe acquired for $3.4 billion last year."
It's looking good! - kasted, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7im definetly am looking forward to see whats new in photoshop cs3
- chazcron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I've made a good living from Photoshop for 16 years, and used to love the intuitive and thoughtful changes they made to it. But as time moved on, (and their monopoly solodified) the modifications weren't as thoroughly tested. User feedback seemed to fall on deaf ears. I don't have the time to beta-test, but many hinky things remain in Photoshop YEARS after they were introduced. Do I have to be warned that I have no pixels selected after 16 years of use and EIGHT years after suggesting a radio check box to NOT BE WARNED AGAIN E-V-E-R?
Special "Insult to injury" award to the programmer who added this option to some feature I never use but NOT to selections. Next session doing intense selections with the lasso and a Wacom, I suggest NOT counting the number of times this occurs when aborting a selection, as it may affect your sanity. We have a running gag in my office amongst the Pshop users counting out loud these frustrating occurences.
Don't get me started. - gateway, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3how about a new version of dw with better css support and layout options
- TheSpook, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's funny that you can now count how much software costs in Dells.
"Adobe Creative $uite 2.3 will cost you 2 Dells and a 19" LCD."
The price of software is getting a wee bit ridiculous. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@Daniel591992
Thats gotta be the most ironic thing ive read today :). - schlongmeister, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I use Photoshop and Illustrator CS2 on a daily basis on a two G4s and a dual G5. I'm not buying an Intel Mac until Adobe releases a Universal Binary version of the apps. I predict that there are a lot of other Mac users out there waiting to do the same.
- mateo60, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wait, you can BUY Photoshop???
- MisterKen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3In the article it mentions that the software was code named "Red Pill".
In the Matrix, the Red Pill answers the question "what is the Matrix?" Once you took it, the seething hell hole that the earth had become was clear.
Are we getting a little peek into what is going on inside of Adobe?
I think I'll wait until C3.3 to install, thankyouverymuch. - kyriakos, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4a merge of golive and dreamweaver will be very interesting. dreamweaver might be the leader but golive does have its good points too
- skyeflye, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Oh and let's not forget the "genius" hyperlink to the product's main page at the top of the toolbar in every CS App. How many times have we accidentally clicked that stupid "button" instead of the marquee or the move tool? And to add insult to injury, it always causes a browser to open the main product page page on Adobe's site that "helpfully" informs us how great the App is and why we should buy it. For the 400th time, I already own it! Argh!!
- ulysseshead, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't know why you're getting knocked. I hate Bridge too. I image only a really small percentage of users need it. Ugh.
- DaffyDuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wonder if the new version will include fewer new features and improvements due to the extra resources necessary to rewrite much of the code.
- msprout, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Oops. March is before June 2007. My bad.
- mateo60, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've never found Bridge useful. I'm glad other people think that, I figured it was me.
- gwalbridge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@catmistake -- You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Carbon apps have been PPC apps since... hmm, let's see, since Carbon was released. Guess what? Cocoa apps are PPC apps too. One is just native to OS X (being Cocoa), and the other being capable, but less feature-rich, of running in both OS 9 and OS X (Carbon).
They pretty much have to move to XCode, or at least invent some other type of wrapper (which will likely take a large performance hit).
I agree, Adobe slacks in certain areas and, from being a witness to many things inside Adobe, they run their business very bureaucratically... but they are not the "new" Microsoft. They simply have a very very large set of products to port. - spectre_25gt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Fireworks is nowhere near as powerful as Photoshop. If you find that Photoshop "gets in your way" as you're doing designs, then you need to learn the program better. Personally, there's no effect that I can think of that I can't figure out how to do in Photoshop. Fireworks, on the other hand, was never designed to be able to do the things that Photoshop does, so it can't. If you stick to fireworks, you're going to eventually find that your sites are staying too similar and lacking.
"To each their own" is fine when you're talking about comparable tools, but Fireworks just isn't on the same level. - relativesanity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@vadimts: Woohoo!
@Spectre_25gt: Interesting comment - care to elaborate? I've been using fireworks effectively in the professional web development sector for years. It's useless for "creating" websites, but then so are all visual editors. However, I find it to be the perfect tool for manipulating bitmap-based designs with vector-based sensibilities. Comps are effortless in Fireworks as it lets me modify any element without having to faff with layers unless I want to. Any time I use Photoshop it just gets in my way.
In my opinion, Photoshop is great for post-processing already-complete work, but I find it useless for any layout origination.
But hey, different strokes for different folks. - Sp4nk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Does it include a new version of the ***** useless, bloated, piece-of-***** trash known as Adobe Bridge?
I love Photoshop and almost all of Adobe products, but having a program for the sole purpose of browsing Adobe files when the original explorer extension did the job just fine really sucks bawl satchel. - catmistake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@gwalbridge
and there's no chance I could know that, and it be exactly what I'm talking about, and I still be disappointed in Adobe? You're saying that using carbon elements in their apps for the last 6 years is fine, its ok, that's just as good as native (I don't care what it technically is)? Sorry pal... carbon is for slackers. Adobe SHOULD have been dedicated to going completely cocoa with their apps within a few years of OS X release. But they chose to be a slow moving giant like, ahem, you know - rYno, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1$160 for an upgrade... and all that's updated is Acrobat?
- vadimts, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0spectre_25gt, you're wrong.
First of all, Adobe IS continuing to develop Fireworks, and will include it in its product line.
Please read this statement (http://groups.google.com/group/macromedia.fireworks/msg/302cfca0c36c6eb0) by Danielle Beaumont, Fireworks Product Manager at Adobe. He clearly states that Adobe has no plans to kill FW.
And second, Fireworks is a great, (if not to say - best), application for a web design. It's much better than Adobe ImageReady, so I won't be surprised if Fireworks will replace ImageReady in the Photoshop & ImageReady combo, (but that's just my opinion). - cornyflake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The main feature I'm looking for is some nice css/xhtml generation ("Save for web"). (Including the little things like converting rectangles with strokes and gradient overlays to divs with borders and gradient backgrounds, etc.)
- neoian, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I'm glad to hear it comes wth dreamweaver! I'll have to end up buying this soon, but i'll wait for CS3
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1thats why i still use photoshop 5.5
its got to be one of the best releases ever
stable, fast and not bloated in fancy GUI effects - relativesanity, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0I know it was inevitable, but it's sad to see Fireworks taken out back and shot :(
- Cymrubeats, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0They've really latched onto the style of Apple marketing. Add a new paintbrush (or widget in Apples case) and charge $100+ for the privilege.
- kanavulator, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Let the beta-leaking begin!
What I look forward to most is the Macromedia tech integration, and as much as I prefer Notepad, Dreamweaver's a welcome addition to Creative Suite :] - fatnutz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0Anybody else here sick of new suites every year?
For what I paid for the CS2 suite I expect more than just a patch every once in a while. - Daniel591992, on 10/12/2007, -17/+10including you ;)
- DannySpace, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Stop saying Mactel.
- catmistake, on 10/12/2007, -11/+0those of you who are waiting... you will be waiting a long time. Consider this, had you said the same thing about PPC apps, you never would have bought a PPC (no, CS1 & 2 still contain carbon code, those slackers!).
At lease, we hope, they're moving to xcode this time. I believe it when I see it.
Adobe: the new Microsoft - msprout, on 10/12/2007, -17/+5All things considered, Microsoft might beat Adobe to the Universal Binary bandwagon with Office 2007 hitting the scene relatively soon.
Different horses, yeah, but public perception is blind to performance-testing. - Cymrubeats, on 10/12/2007, -19/+3Wow, more software for the Mactel, definitely front page news.
- happyyellowbug, on 10/12/2007, -38/+7Losers. March 2007 release is not exactly RAPID.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is