PS X looks like it is coming!!!

michaelm8000michaelm8000
Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
I just found this on <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com"; target="_blank">www.thinksecret.com</a>



it is a leak about PS for OS X and it has the first screen shots!! I can not wait. it say the beta should be coming in the next week or 2. I will be the first in line to get it!!

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    falconfalcon Posts: 458member
    Can you say Macworld San Fran?
  • Reply 2 of 13
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    mm, when I read the article it said a beta will be released in the "upcoming months" not weeks.



    Maybe a beta in Jan.
  • Reply 3 of 13
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    ...and since when does "beta" mean "public beta"? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />



    When I first saw this thread I thought you were gonna rant about a Sony Playstation (aka."PSX").
  • Reply 4 of 13
    rick1138rick1138 Posts: 938member
    I hate that toolbar at the top-that same obnoxious thing is in Adobe Acrobat Reader-very Windows.
  • Reply 5 of 13
    logan calelogan cale Posts: 1,281member
    You mean the same toolbar that has been in Photoshop 6 for months? I find it very useful.
  • Reply 6 of 13
    masterzeusmasterzeus Posts: 111member
    For people with carracho memberships, beta means public beta.
  • Reply 7 of 13
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]I hate that toolbar at the top-that same obnoxious thing is in Adobe Acrobat Reader-very Windows<hr></blockquote>Ummm... have you used any of the newer nersions of Photoshop? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> Not only can you move it to somewhere else, but you can hide it with Window -&gt; Hide Options.



    [quote]For people with carracho memberships, beta means public beta.<hr></blockquote>

    OF course!! How could I forget?
  • Reply 8 of 13
    j3kyllj3kyll Posts: 7member
    [quote]Originally posted by MasterZeus:

    <strong>For people with carracho memberships, beta means public beta. </strong><hr></blockquote>



    damn right
  • Reply 9 of 13
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    I am NOT looking forward to all the palettes casting shadows on the palettes positioned directly beneath them. Ugly. I can't believe Adobe couldn't code around that. Looks hideous, and hope either Apple inplements utility windows or Adobe hardcodes them in.



    ...ugly..dropshadows..palettes..stupid..ugly..grrr
  • Reply 10 of 13
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    the same pallette dropshadow problem is extant in Illustrator 10 too..



    It's rather annoying, seeing as the last-clicked on pallette casts a bigger shadow than the rest, too...





    sometimes i really question apple's priorities of form and function w.r.t OS X... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
  • Reply 11 of 13
    michaelm8000michaelm8000 Posts: 297member
    [quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:

    <strong>the same pallette dropshadow problem is extant in Illustrator 10 too..



    It's rather annoying, seeing as the last-clicked on pallette casts a bigger shadow than the rest, too...





    sometimes i really question apple's priorities of form and function w.r.t OS X... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>



    back off dropshdows!! that are so cool!! If you do not like them you can use "shadowkiller". I like them. You will get used to it.
  • Reply 12 of 13
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by Michaelm8000:

    <strong>back off dropshdows!! that are so cool!! If you do not like them you can use "shadowkiller". I like them. You will get used to it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    No, no, no, Michael, you don't get it. Shadows themselves are fine. I don't think anyone here is arguing against shadows altogether. It's the fact that these palettes cast shadows on eachother that is a bad thing. IIRC, windows can be coded to exist in the same "layer" and therefore not cast shadows on eachother, but only on things "below" them. Why couldn't Adobe do this???
  • Reply 13 of 13
    michaelm8000michaelm8000 Posts: 297member
    [quote]Originally posted by starfleetX:

    <strong>

    No, no, no, Michael, you don't get it. Shadows themselves are fine. I don't think anyone here is arguing against shadows altogether. It's the fact that these palettes cast shadows on eachother that is a bad thing. IIRC, windows can be coded to exist in the same "layer" and therefore not cast shadows on eachother, but only on things "below" them. Why couldn't Adobe do this???</strong><hr></blockquote>



    ok, I kinda get it. So when they are together they cast one large shadow? and when you pull one window apart the others keep a big shadow and the indipendent window has it's own shadow? That would be nice That screen shot was just a early beta they could still put it in.



    A couple of other features I would like to see are: being able to have folders within folders, have paltet sets (like in flash and FinalCutPro) have the shap tools be able to do just utlines of shapes, and have a gradent tool that would bend a gradent along a path, and when selecting a font it should give you a preview of the selected text in the font your mouse is over (just like they do in flash). If PhotoShop has these it will make me so so very happy!



    BTW: I love the new little icons in the tool palet and all. But I HATE the PhotoShop icon!! And the Ilustrator one!



    [ 12-07-2001: Message edited by: Michaelm8000 ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.