digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Amazon leaks Adobe CS3 pricing, availability dates, Mac code split

appleinsider.com — One of the largest online retailers has let slip the entire launch strategy for Adobe's Creative Suite 3 and its various individual apps -- and revealed that PowerPC-based Macs may soon become second-class citizens in the program designer's eyes.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • hadimirza, on 03/26/2008, -138/+2I gave up on CS3 beta after It crashed while making my site logo. it took me 2 hours and i didn't save.

    So i went back to CS2...because it was more stable
    • defectDS, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1562 hours and no save? And you blame the beta software?
    • asif5th, on 10/12/2007, -43/+33Can't wait till Bittorrnet leaks it :|
    • joaob, on 10/12/2007, -9/+65I admit I've been out of the scene for a little but....correct me if I'm wrong....Bittorrent doesn't do the leaking.
    • asif5th, on 10/12/2007, -10/+58Yes, I correct myself, I can't wait until it's LEAKED on the torrent sites.
    • GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -4/+27I use it about two or three hours a day, often with ridiculously large sizes (over twenty megapixels), and it's never crashed on me. Running Windows XP Professional. It's some of the most stable beta software I've ever used. Don't blame the beta program for your misuse of the software. If you didn't feel like taking five seconds to hit CTRL + S, you shouldn't be using BETA software. Why do you have a website?

      The only real problem with CS3 is that if you hit the "F" shortcut to change window types, the Start bar will remain black after a complete cycle. Not a big deal, as the start bar doesn't serve any use in Photoshop, and because you just need to alt tab out then alt tab in. There are a few other small bugs, but most of them are on the Mac. CS3 is much faster than CS2, and the new features are great.
    • Cleanlyness, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2Do you guys actually download the executable on torrents? That's stupid, you could get 1MB downloads from Adobe. Besides, there is a "crack" for Ps CS3 which you have to do every few days but it takes only about a minute.
    • ufia, on 10/12/2007, -28/+6Why any new stuff coming from or involving Apple is always called "leaked". Quit it already, it's like an old Carrot Top joke. Call it a press release like everybody else, Apple is not fooling us anymore with the "leakage" marketing stunts.
    • pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23Gee, a beta version crashed?
    • eitheehstsergei, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5i cant wait till morons stop boasting about piracy so huge organizations would stop suing children and dead people just to make a point and people who actually find piracy useful can enjoy it in peace
    • zongamin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Serves you right, dunce
    • Nobi-Wan, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Meh, CS2 will still do the job fine for me.
    • uhbeta, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8@ufia

      ummmm this would be Adobe, not Apple
    • GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15@Nobi

      I no longer use CS2. CS3 is a freaking stallion compared to the slow mule that is CS2.
    • cry187, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1what do you expect?! It's a beta, it's not yet stable.
    • Clearz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Adobe CS3 Master Collection Price: FREE on Torrent.
    • OwdenBowden, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Well - Do tell about the PS CS3 crack... I mean - don't just put it out there and not give up the goods... I could use it and so could everyone else because Adobe is smoking some serious crack of their own with these prices...
    • adc86, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wait, why are you designing a logo in Photoshop in the first place?
  • perre, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16Is Adobe really splitting the installer packages btw Intel and PPC??? I know many Mac users have a G4/G5 tower and intel macbook. Do they expect users to buy two collections?
    • wild, on 10/12/2007, -9/+45Well, technically you are supposed to have a seperate license for each copy/computer you use. So, yea.
    • mastercheif, on 10/12/2007, -10/+6Also, it keeps costs down because Universal Binary is like 1.75 times the size of a single binary app.
    • perre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I spent some time on the amazon.ca site reading the details... It appears that they ARE selling almost all of the apps as Universal Binary by listing each one as "Mac OS X, Mac OS X Intel." I think this means that they may only be abandoning PPC in the Master collection (what appleinsider suggested) which I'm guessing means that two or three apps in the collection (After Effects, for example) aren't being updated for PPC, while the rest in that package are the same installers as you get in an individual app purchase.

      So if you were to empty your pocketbook on the master collection, you'll probably be able to install on your portable and your main system, but certain apps would only be intel compatible... we'll see when the official details are announced.
    • HiddenLYNX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@wild, perre
      I talked to a representative while trying to install CS2 on my mac. The guy says Adobe allows installations on two computers, so long as you run one at a time. That was the word from someone who works there, I dont think theyd lie.
    • thatsmyaibo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@Hidden

      You are absolutely correct. I have an iBook and a new iMac and run it on both. Adobe customer support says it's ok as long as one at a time is running the serial number.
    • Nobi-Wan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I have Adobe CS2 and I was told you can have up to three computers using it, with one of the computers "leap frogging" the serial code.
    • SwamiG, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3@HiddenLynx

      I used to be one of those "representatives" that "work for Adobe". I lied a lot to people on the phone, just as I was told to. And FYI, those "representatives" don't really work directly for Adobe.

      In this case, though, they do appear to be telling the truth.
    • oedenfield, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The current Adobe CS2 license allows for installing on two computers in the case of a work and home computers. The catch is that they can not be used concurrently. I would assume that a desktop and a laptop installation would be allowed as long as they wouldn't be used at the same time.
    • flashboy131, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Every agency I have worked for allowed me the option to install on my home machine.
    • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Adobe stuff are having giant chunks of code, it is perfectly normal to have 2 separate install DVDs or CDs for that kind of code.

      Adobe separated Flash install package too, there is PPC and Intel versions. Same goes for Adobe Acrobat reader.

      Some of these guys think Adobe doesn't pay money for their bandwidth and wouldn't care to add 5 mb of needless code to a millions downloaded software but it is not the fact :)
    • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@flashboy they may have a special license, it is common for the companies of that size. E.g. like limitless license.
  • julzmon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Sucks that only Flash has a new UI. Seems quite sloppy for Dreamweaver and Fireworks with the old MM UI. That's one of the high features I was wishing for... the death of the horrible MM UI on the Mac
    • wild, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3I think that shows that DW/FW will not be supported in the future.
    • pintong, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Dreamweaver not supported in the future? Not likely.
    • perre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I spoke with an Adobe developer at MacWorld in January, and he assured me that the Flash UI and flash integration with the rest of the suite were the two primary things they were attempting to tackle for this next release. To my mind, even if those were the ONLY two things they were fixing in flash, that would an enormously appreciated change.
    • colincornaby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"I think that shows that DW/FW will not be supported in the future."

      Which is why GoLive doesn't seem to be part of CS3? : scratches head :
    • oedenfield, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I'm just glad that dreamweaver means the death of golive
    • veracon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I also strongly doubt DW will be unsupported; as much as I'm against WYSIWYG, I have to admit Dreamweaver is the best out there.
  • Mudcrutch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14That matrix of products is out of control.
    • jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Some of us are happy to still have fireworks being made universal... I know I wasn't ready for the loss of such a great web image creation and editing software. Yeah photoshop is better for some things but when you grow accustomed to software for a certain role it sucks learning something new just to appease the company who discontinued the old stuff.
  • geeke, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13holy crap thats alot of money.
    • ctrlfreak13, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Welcome to the professional world, where the price reflects the fact that they expect that you make a living off the product rather than use it for personal use.
    • GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2$95 US? That's about 1/4 of the average web design project.
    • GraceMolloy, on 10/12/2007, -15/+5And that's exactly why the only copy of it I ever own will be a pirated copy.

      Three grand my ass.
    • spargett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"$95 US? That's about 1/4 of the average web design project."

      $400 website? Holy hell thats cheap. Maybe I'm just used to working in the Bay Area.
    • spectre_25gt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13$3000.00 is the price for the full suite which looks like it includes about 15 full programs. That comes out to about $200.00 per application which is actually very good pricing for professional software. Compare that to Maya Unlimited at about $10,000.00 for a single (***** amazing) application.
    • amadeusdemarzi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5@ gracemolloy

      and we care because? It's not like you are going contribute any artistic merit to the world using those packages anyway...
    • magic6435, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16"$95 US? That's about 1/4 of the average web design project."

      i don't know about you but we charge $3,000 just to get started and they can run as high as $25,000 and thats still under-charging industry standards.
    • GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6AVERAGE website cost. I don't charge charities money for my work, and I've done a couple of sites for local bands that don't have the funds. Have I ever done a design for more than $400? Of course. Average web design cost, if you include every designer and every website, is easily $400 or under.
    • chadu, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8GawtMilk, it's lowballers like you that make being an actual pro web designer difficult. $400? I wouldn't even meet with a client for that much money.
    • DonCarcharo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Just last week I bid on a project that was a custom designed CMS enabled website with bulletin board & online web gallery. I lost the project after being the only developer to bid over $500. I kept thinking to myself, you've got to be kidding me? $500? You know the developer is just going to use a base install of WordPress with a free (possibly slightly modified) template at that price.

      I hate to say it but the low end of the market keeps getting lower and lower.
    • felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11People need to give GawtMilk a break. I just checked his page on DeviantArt, [ http://hkisgotmilk.deviantart.com/ ] and it says he's 15 years old. When I was a teenager, I was doing flyers and t-shirts for my friends' bands and such, and I didn't charge much either.

      I don't think anyone has to worry about their prices being undercut by the "bottom end" - it's not like his clients could ever afford your professional work, and he's got to start somewhere. What were YOU doing when you were 15?

    • GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Lowballers like me? Don't blame the fact that you can't get a job on the fact that I don't rape charities for money. I have often done high-paying projects, but as mentioned...I'm only 16. It isn't in my best interests to charge charities $25,000 for a couple hours of work. Maybe when I'm older, I'll have the knowledge that it's proper ettiqutte to squeeze out as much money as I can from local bands, my school, and charities.

      If you're making designs that are worth $1,300 you could easily get that much money. Don't blame me for your poor abilities. I've made the occasional $600+ design...I don't know how much you were charging when you were a kid. As felch said (hopefully not sarcastically), I'm just a kid, money isn't the important thing, a portfolio is.
  • erdnaze, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1the age of ma/crobe is over.
  • gokss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Thanks Amazon.... :)
  • livefire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5technically if you own more than one computer you can put it on every one you use personally. That's why cs2 could be installed on up to 4 computers with one key.
  • m00dy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4CS3 beta on mac always crashed on me (but it was so much faster than CS2)
  • virtualscribe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This new product Sound Booth seems to have replaced the amazing Audition. I used that audio editor during the late 90s when Syntrillium called it Cool Edit pro. Leo Laporte talked about it as something old radio guys around the country used in an old episode of Kevin Rose and Dan Huard's "Podcasting" episode: www.revision3.com/systm/podcasting

    Also, it looks like Adobe's marketing director will get a raise; without paying any money for ads, they have people actually talking about their product pre release. They don't have to go through the normal channels, they don't have to put google ads or banners anywhere, just "leak" their prices from a non US company and this secret insider info now becomes available. In a tough marketplace where they are competing with themselves, where business analysts watching stock prices are saying people won't switch from CS1 or CS2, they get all this buzzword compliant viral talk swirling about thier product from web 2.0 sites. Adobe 2.0
    • Tonamel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2From http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/soundbooth/ (under Product Details):

      "Will Adobe Audition continue as a stand alone product?
      Absolutely. Adobe Audition will still be available for anyone who focuses on audio, and the team is hard at work on it right now."

      So, thankfully, Soundbooth is not replacing Audition.
  • CodeofHonor, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3My PS CS3 Beta doesn't even load anymore :(
    • thinsoldier, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Adobe Photoshop CS3AMT
      start photoshop, cancel the wizard and close photoshop
      rename application.sif to application.sif.xxxxx
      problem fixed.

      these steps will have to be repeated on the 1st of every month
  • Xorp, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Can't wait to pir... er... buy this excellent software.
  • UglyShirts, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1No, thanks. I'll stick with Corel Design Suite X3. It's a fraction of the price, uses a hell of a lot less memory, does more, exports/imports dozens more formats, is more intuitive, has traditionally had features several versions ahead of Adobe, and I don't have to drop thousands on a ***** Fisher-Price My First Computer to run it.
    • magic6435, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5"Fisher-Price My First Computer to run it."

      i'm soooo lost..... your gonna need to explain that please.
    • UglyShirts, on 10/12/2007, -17/+2"i'm soooo lost..... your gonna need to explain that please."

      It's what people who use real computers call that hippy-dippy, over-shiny and under-functional, proprietary-to-the-***** Apple crap.
    • EmileVictor, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5The reason why creatives use Apple products is because they are not necessarily very computer literate. If they can get the tools they need without having to worry about the computer themselves it is a good thing.
    • nekaidesigns, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15"The reason why creatives use Apple products is because they are not necessarily very computer literate. If they can get the tools they need without having to worry about the computer themselves it is a good thing."

      That is one point of view - though, I am a creative, and am quite computer literate. I use OSX because I am sensitive to the environment in which i am being creative - windows is ugly and unintuitive, OSX is beautiful and works exactly as it should. I could use windows if i wanted to, and be perfectly productive. but In OSX, I'm surrounded by good design, and I feel that it improves my ability to produce good design.
    • fkr3, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2You can customise the way windows works. Or maximise the window in which case you see virtually none of it. You guys got that maximise thing worked out yet or do you still devote part of your screen real estate to a wallpaper picture?
    • mipadi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"It's what people who use real computers call that hippy-dippy, over-shiny and under-functional, proprietary-to-the-***** Apple crap."

      Funny… I went to a talk by one of the foremost computer security researchers, and he's a Mac user, as are a number of my computer science professors. Most of the Ruby on Rails team uses Macs to some degree... A number of other computer science researchers have switched to Macs... Yep, seems people who use Macs aren't really doing real stuff with them.
    • adc86, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hey, man, to each their own and all that crap... All I know is that when I show up at the national iteration of an Ad/Design competition last year in KC, the chick setting up 'Doze and Corel was straight up laughed at. Didn't win, either.

      Then again, if you're just engraving trophies, I guess Corel is fine.
  • Boof, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Boo Hoo PPC?

    That article was borderline whiner *****.

    Do you expect forward versions to cater to old techology? No thanks. I'm happy PPC is second class citizens. I would hope the developers actually got their act together and took advantage of available intel/graphics ability.
    • Kelmon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Not a diplomatic answer but more or less correct. Focus should certainly be given to the Intel platform for future releases of the Mac version because PowerPC, like it or not, is now legacy hardware. I'd suggest that it still needs to be considered for a CS4 release but after that Adobe could probably drop support for it entirely since all PowerPC machines will likely be at least 5-years old by that time and due for replacement.
  • kim^lwx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's nice to see that the full Acrobat package will be included with CS3 Design Standard, which it was not when I purchased my CS1 package. Also, I think it nice to see more designated packages suited for web development etc.

    @virtualscribe: You're right in the sense that Adobe is competing with themselves. There is practically no competition as the Adobe program suite has become de-facto standard in the graphic design business - and that for a good reason; they are awesome products. To me it's not much surprise that people start talking about the upcoming versions before the official announcement; a lot of people use these applications as their day-by-day tool set and of course people anticipate new features, changes, and upgrades to make their daily working life better and more efficient.
    • UglyShirts, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1"There is practically no competition as the Adobe program suite has become de-facto standard in the graphic design business - and that for a good reason; they are awesome products."

      Ask anyone who's used Corel and Adobe both in comparable versions, and they definitely know better. BOY, do they ever. The incomprehensible Mac bias in the design world costs art departments cumulative fortunes in upgrades and productivity losses every year. I mean, really...Those of use who've used both know it takes 10 minutes in Corel Design Suite to do things that take two hours in Adobe.
    • nekaidesigns, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7uglyshirts - like what? I'm genuinely curious - what does corel "x" do so much faster than adobe "y" ?
    • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5uglyshirts,
      Does PS cost less when you use a PC? Isn't the software pricing the same for both platforms? If you're talking about the cost of the computer, that's nonsense because high-end Macs don't cost significantly more than high-end PCs. Sure you can run PS on a $300 Costco special, but you won't run it well. Professionals use professional tools and that includes the computers they run it on. Whether they use a Mac or Windows based PC, they are not cheap computers. If a designer prefers a Mac OR a WinPC, buy them the best one you can afford. They'll be happier and more productive which translates into more money for your company. Get over yourself and your Mac hatred.
    • Quix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"The incomprehensible Mac bias in the design world costs art departments cumulative fortunes in upgrades and productivity losses every year." - uglyshirts

      The incomprehensible Windows bias in the corporate world costs IT departments cumulative fortunes in upgrades and productivity losses every year.

      (I should know: I have to use Windows all day at my corporate job.)

      Sorry for responding to the troll. Now back to the original topic.
  • nonconformist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Wow! Get 2 at that price!
  • origclubsoda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I cant believe I am going to have to spend $2000. :(
  • skoot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2the upgrade matrix looks like a starbucks menu....

    anyone care to translate?
  • Subtonic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I wish I could pick and choose my bundle. I need Indesign, Illustrator, Photoshop, and Dreamweaver - pretty much what the CS2.3 bundle is now. Nothing like that is offered in CS3.
    • adc86, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1get InDesign, Illustrator, and Photoshop, and then pick up TextMate or Smultron and learn yo'self some XHTML ;)
  • r2pro, on 10/12/2007, -8/+0Why do people use Dreamweaver? What's wrong with a text editor? Seriously, those WYSIWYG editors are harder to learn than the actual HTML / CSS standards.
  • polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Is the New Premiere that much different than Pro 2.0? I just bought the damn thing last semester. or did they just chuck the new name on them?
  • serpicolugnut, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Looks like my upgrade from PS CS2 to the Web Premium bundle will be about $1399 (Amazon lists it at $1349). I've held out a while on MX 2004, Illustrator 10, so I guess I shouldn't whine too much about the price.

    One thing I noticed from the screenshots is that Illustrator and Flash got the Photoshop CS3 pallette/dock treatment, whereas Dreamweaver and Fireworks didn't. That's kind of disappointing. I was hoping Adobe would make the pallettes consistent across all the apps.
  • serpicolugnut, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Subtonic - Just get the standard bundle, and add another $299 for Dreamweaver.
  • JohnnyRad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4hate to break it to you, but all mac devers are on the cusp of dumping power pc, this is common knowledge.
    • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Some of us work with serious software houses who sometimes still maintain their OS 9 version.

      Talk for yourself and the junk you use.
    • JohnnyRad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Ilgaz
      guess what doitch? me too! and we dont sully our hands w/ that os 9 crap.
  • Topher06, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Honestly, except for the G5 generation, I can't see any so called professional designer wanting to use a G4 PowerPC Mac. When Apple moved to Intel based computers they doubled to quadrupled the performance over G4 based Mac's, and rivaled or surpassed dual G5 systems. Apple moving to Intel pretty much made PowerPC Mac's obsolete.

    I can understand how upset people that made the investment of a G5 system finding out the newest applications might not be available to them, but then, what does CS3 offer that most people can live without and still use CS2? Its like anything, why upgrade unless there is a point to upgrade. Personally, I would prefer if a new generation of software took advantage of a new generation of hardware, rather then new generations of software comprimising on features and performance to cater to old machines. Adobe is drawing the line and saying if you want a new level of performance and feature sets, you need to upgrade your Mac's to Intel.

    Its not Adobe's fault that Apple nullified an entire generation of Mac's.
    • tomarocco, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Exactly...if PPC users are in such a hurry to spend more of their (parents') money, they should support their guru by going out and buying his Intel machines instead of whining about a third-party software development company's offerings. If CS2 isn't good enough for the PPC crowd, then CS3 won't be either. Bunch of still-living-at-home prima donna fag designers is what they are. Anyone with a legitimate business need is already on an Intel Mac (or soon to be out-of-business), so the point is moot.
    • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@topher
      I'm not sure why people are digging you down for telling the truth. Adobe sees all Intel macs for the future and therefore they're moving to that platform exclusively. We've all known that Apple is going Intel for almost two years now, why would they bother to release a high end program like PS CS3 for a machine that will never be made again? Most pro shops update their computers at least every two years, so most of the Mac PS pros are now buying (or will buy once CS3 ships) Intel Macs.

      Most of the WinPC PS pros I'm sure aren't using P4s anymore, so why would Adobe gear toward an older market?
    • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@tomorocco the G5 people who are needlessly in panic are professionals which happen to run 8 Gig RAM installed Quad G5 or Dual G5 systems with SCSI towers and ATTO/Fiber adapters.

      Needless to say, it is not about parents money or professionals who works that size throws away a working system because Mr. Jobs said it is "slow".

      I personally saw a dual G4 system which is maxed to the limit doing HD Dolby processing happily. I don't think they will throw it out until Apple and AVID drops support.
  • JohnnyRad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm holding out for the Adobe Creative Suite Legendary Edition...it comes in a masterchief helmet case!
  • felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I wonder how many more legitimate copies of Photoshop Adobe would sell if they offered it at $200. I have a feeling the piracy would drop dramatically, and they'd probably end up with a fatter bottom line when all is said and done.

    There are a lot of design professionals just starting out for whom Elements isn't sufficient, but who can't pay the $600 Photoshop costs now.
    • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think everything will change in near future. Adobe seems to ship a subscription, platform neutral "Web Photoshop" which may have some great features. Entire software moves to subscription model anyway :)
  • Iwantawii, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You can buy a new Intel Mac for less than the price of some versions of CS3.
  • StiGUP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0damn i need universal adobe....wtf are they waiting for!!
  • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Adobe's policy after Intel Mac/Universal is to separate CPU installers for popular products, if you go to Flash page you will see it defaults to your CPU type rather than offering Universal versions. If you imagine how many millions download Flash you will understand why.

    It is not like G5, the current majority (still at pro world) is getting second class from Adobe.

    Photoshop Elements 3 Trial (.app) is 56 MB for instance. That is their end user, "Light" program which is rather old.
  • kris33, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I am sure many of you didn't notice that they upped screenshots for all major applications. I discovered them just by accident, and there is no mention in the AppleInsider article of it.

    Photoshop CS3 Extended: http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/software/detail-page/mac_composite_ui_int-th.jpg
    Illustrator CS3: http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/software/detail-page/illustratormac.jpg
    Indesign CS3: http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/software/detail-page/layout.jpg
    Flash CS3: http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/software/detail-page/premium-flash-import.jpg
    Dreamweaver CS3: http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/software/detail-page/dreamweaver-mac.jpg
    Fireworks CS3: http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/software/detail-page/fworks-mac.jpg
    Premiere Pro CS3:http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/software/detail-page/pr-mac-win.jpg
  • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The non G5 compatible apps are originally Windows code which are converted to Intel only via some commercial development packages. Just like Cider tool for games.

    The Windows Only Apps are considered a joke in professional segment they are coded for. Soundbooth (Replace Protools?) , Premiere (End user camera bundled versions exist,replace to Final Cut or AVID?) etc. etc.

    I am a bit tired of people who jumps up and down saying PPC is dead, if you were in professional World you would figure some of Macs are running OS 9 and recently getting prepared to move OS X. Some of real Adobe customers/licensees aren't interested in CS3 until some Adobe person comes and shows them a REAL LIFE advantage such as getting job done faster too.
  • omgcthulhu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yeah...that's too funny ;)
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.