or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Sources offer peek at Adobe Creative Suite 5 for Mac
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sources offer peek at Adobe Creative Suite 5 for Mac

post #1 of 129
Thread Starter 
The fifth major release of Adobe's Creative Suite package (CS5) for graphic, video and web design professionals will finally see Photoshop for Mac emerge as a 64-bit application while several of suite's other component applications adopt Flash tie-ins aimed at keeping content developers reliant on the company's embattled multimedia platform.

64-bit Photoshop CS5

Slated for shipment this spring, CS5 for Mac will be spearheaded by a version of the market-leading Photoshop graphics editor that's been rewritten in Apple's 64-bit object-oriented Cocoa framework, finally bringing it up to spec with its Windows cousin, which made the jump to 64-bit back in 2008 as part of Creative Suite 4.0 (CS4).*

Adobe had initially planned to deliver Mac users with a 64-bit version of Photoshop alongside the CS4 release, but was forced to delay those efforts until CS5 at the earliest after Apple decided to abort the development of a 64-bit version of Carbon.

The original foundation of Photoshop's modern codebase was written in Carbon, Mac OS X's legacy, 32-bit framework for developing Mac applications. Adobe said it would need at least an extra year to port the interface code of Photoshop and its companion apps to Apple's new 64-bit Cocoa framework, using the same model used for its Lightroom product, in order to deliver a 64-bit app.

As such, the bulk of the Adobe's efforts on Photoshop CS5, which goes by the code-name "White Rabbit," will reportedly come in the flavor of under-the-hood improvements, according to people who are familiar with the latest private betas of CS5 for Mac. The casual Photoshop user won't recognize too much of a difference in the software over the existing version, these people say. Instead, the enhancements will play to designers who work with relatively large files, manipulate 3D objects, and work with video.



The bulk of the other changes within Photoshop CS5 are said to focus on 3D features. Adobe has also reportedly added a retouching capability which makes it easier to remove objects from images.





In its own internal tests, Adobe found the average 64-bit app to run about 8 to 12 percent faster than a 32-bit one. The primary advantage of 64-bit applications is their ability to address very large amounts of memory in excess of the 4GB limit of 32-bit apps.

John Nack, Senior Product Manager for Photoshop applications, wrote that the new 64-bit version "is great for pro photographers with large collections of high-res images," in an April 2008 blog posting. He noted that opening a 3.75 gigapixel image on a 4-core machine with 32GB RAM is about 10x faster in the 64-bit version of Photoshop currently under development than it is on the existing version.

Flash & Dreamweaver CS5

Flash CS5 (codenamed Viper) and Dreamweaver CS5 (codenamed Bowie) both now add code hinting to help users that author in ActionScript, a feature that has long been available in other development software.

With Apple refusing to support Flash as an web plugin runtime on the iPhone, iPod touch and the new iPad, Adobe has initiated a new strategy in trying to maintain relevance for Flash among mobile developers: it now enables its Flash development tool to output native iPhone apps that recycle existing Flash-related assets and scripting in a form that Apple will allow in the iTunes App Store. These native iPhone apps do not require any Flash runtime on the device in order to work.

"This functionality is not working in the current beta versions," people familiar with the *matter tell AppleInsider, adding "we don’t think serious developers will use Flash for creating iPhone applications. It also appears that Adobe continues to miss the boat with HTML 5, and is focused almost exclusively on trying to get users to depend more on Flash – even as the Web development community is looking elsewhere."

InDesign CS5

A new CS5 version of InDesign will also aim to shore up the viability of Flash by encouraging traditional print publishers to enhance their print designs, such as brochures and magazines, with video and animations using Flash. Adobe reportedly hopes this content will be delivered on the web via proprietary Flash files, an approach reminiscent of its arch rival Quark, which attempted to add interactive features to QuarkXPress with a product called Quark Immedia.

When creating a new InDesign CS5 document, users are asked if their document is for print or the web. However, people familiar with the beta software report that, since "Dreamweaver does a better job of laying out pages for the web, we can’t understand why Adobe would then add similar features to InDesign – which lacks any of the features required for managing a Web site."

Web review and Mini Bridge features

Adobe CS5 will also add review capabilities across all its component apps, making it easier to have non-CS5 users review work being done by designers. The review features are an extension of Adobe’s Connect business, which is similar to on-line meetings used by WebEx. Designers can collect feedback on their work from others within a web-conferencing meeting.

Adobe has also create a 'mini-Bridge' within the applications to enable developers to inspect files for placing or editing without leaving the application. "Think of it as a small file browser window," said a person familiar with the new tools.
post #2 of 129
I'd like to see spine-bleed in InDesign5, A critical feature for designing full-bleed perfect-bound books.
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #3 of 129
Does it suck less this time around?
post #4 of 129
Dupe.

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #5 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

As such, the bulk of the Adobe's efforts on Photoshop CS5, which goes by the code-name "White Rabbit," will reportedly come in the flavor of under-the-hood improvements, according to people who are familiar with the latest private betas of CS5 for Mac. The casual Photoshop user won't recognize too much of a difference in the software over the existing version, these people say. Instead, the enhancements will play to designers who work with relatively large files, manipulate 3D objects, and work with video.

...

The bulk of the other changes within Photoshop CS5 are said to focus on 3D features. Adobe has also reportedly added a retouching capability which makes it easier to remove objects from images.

Figures.

I wish Lightroom would get just the pieces of Ps that the average photographer needs instead of trying to sell us both Lr and Ps (or CS Suite). For example, "retouching capability which makes it easier to remove objects from images" should also be in Lr. But that's Adobe in a nutshell, selling you tons of stuff you don't need or want to get the handful of stuff you care about.

I can't wait to see the Byzantine upgrade processes from a current CS product to the new round of CS bundles...

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #6 of 129
I'm feeling bloated already...
post #7 of 129
I wonder what features they will break or hide in this version to confuse us into thinking they actually did something warranting another $1200.
Guess we will find out in CS 5.5 where they 'reveal' or 'fix' them for a small upgrade fee.
post #8 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Adobe reportedly hopes this content will be delivered on the web via proprietary Flash files, an approach reminiscent of its archival Quark, which attempted to add interactive features to QuarkXPress with a product called Quark Immedia.

Was that choice of words intentional? Is Adobe going into Quark's archives for new features?

Or perhaps it should have been arch rival?
post #9 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

InDesign CS5

Adobe reportedly hopes this content will be delivered on the web via proprietary Flash files, an approach reminiscent of its archival Quark, which attempted to add interactive features to QuarkXPress with a product called Quark Immedia.

Typo or Freudian slip?

I think they meant "arch rival"!

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #10 of 129
I skipped CS 4 and hope for the best with CS5. But PLEASE tell me that Flash’s UI is less buggy and quirky and non-standard and MADDENING than every previous version Please?

(All of Adobe’s apps share that criticism, but Flash is the worst. I fight that UI all day.)

Adobe was once my standard for software excellence. I wish it would be again!
post #11 of 129
I'm interested to see if they have fixed the gazillion little flaws in their user interfaces and the lack of uniformity between their apps (for example the gradient tool for Illustrator and Photoshop are completely different). Will we still have that useless color picker bar in Illustrator? Will it still install like a pseudo-Windows app, with folders (even if it only installs part of an application) and shit?

And putting emphasis on 3D? Great, in CS5 I suppose we can make not only 3D tophats but also trucker caps and berets.

Do they listen to their users at all? Users are crying them to fix what is already in there, not adding more half-baked features. I suppose it's hard to sell "like the previous version, except done right this time".
post #12 of 129
i'd really like apple to try and take on adobe at some point tho it's difficult

what bugs me about the cs4 suite besides being as buggy as hell and having interface changes like those in flash that don't make sense (positioning and certain widgets - if i want to increase or decrease a value i want a slider to go up or down not left to right!!) is that some apps have really good features that really should be integrated in the other apps

for example - file recovery. Indesign is the only app that has file recovery and it's prolly the app that crashes the least from the suite (i have experience of flash, indesign, fireworks, pshop and illustrator - not the video apps)

the align tools and the colour pickers from flash and fireworks outclass the align tools in indesign and illustrator - pshop is a joke

fireworks is an excellent app but needs a major boost when dealin with higher res images and psd files

no wonder adobe gripes sites and crash report images are becoming more common.
post #13 of 129
Is it just me, or is the guy who narrates that clip about the silliest thing since Peewee Herman? It's almost like he's trying to sound like an incompetent fool.
GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
post #14 of 129
I am always getting my fingers tangled up when I'm editing text in Dreamweaver, because it doesn't follow Mac keyboard conventions, such as Option arrow and Command arrow doing the same thing. Also, code view and design view use the keyboard differently, which is very frustrating. Press a key to get a big surprise! You never know what is going to happen. I'd rather just do my work.

If Adobe makes Dreamweaver conform to Mac standards, or at least makes it an easily selectable option, I'll upgrade. If it doesn't, I won't.

Is there a beta tester who can help me with this?
post #15 of 129
Aperture 3 is going to make some of Photoshop irrelevant (non destructive brushes etc) for photographers. PS5 is late in the game. Adobe continues to spin chaotically in the Mac realm. Jobs knows it too.
post #16 of 129
Already!? That's a fast update for Creative Suite. I am not putting another $600 into an upgrade this soon. Call me when CS6 is prepped.
post #17 of 129
i hope they fix dreamweaver from being a horrible app to something a designer can understand
post #18 of 129
No news on Illustrator? That is my must have app of the whole bunch.
post #19 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

... As such, the bulk of the Adobe's efforts on Photoshop CS5, which goes by the code-name "White Rabbit," will reportedly come in the flavor of under-the-hood improvements, according to people who are familiar with the latest private betas of CS5 for Mac. The casual Photoshop user won't recognize too much of a difference in the software over the existing version, these people say. Instead, the enhancements will play to designers who work with relatively large files, manipulate 3D objects, and work with video. ...

So even though CS4 was hardly different from CS3 and CS5 will be even less different than CS4 or CS3 ...

We still have to pay a thousand bucks for the privilege of using it, and then another thousand a year later when CS6 comes out? Seriously?

And Adobe wonders why no one likes their products anymore?

Let's see them give away these (long overdue and much asked for), "under the hood" improvements for 30 bucks like Apple did with Snow Leopard.
post #20 of 129
Adobe software is utter crap, someone please step up and show these losers how to innovate and cooperate.
post #21 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

When creating a new InDesign CS5 document, users are asked if their document is for print or the web. However, people familiar with the beta software report that, since "Dreamweaver does a better job of laying out pages for the web, we cant understand why Adobe would then add similar features to InDesign which lacks any of the features required for managing a Web site."

Before coding a website I design it in InDesign first as it's a better program for laying out objects and experimenting with layouts, especially if I'm using a grid. The ability to have a preset for the web would be great, just as Illustrator does in CS4.
post #22 of 129
Quote:
"This functionality is not working in the current beta versions," people familiar with the *matter tell AppleInsider

Whoever these people are, they aren't very familiar with iPhone compiling. It's very much working and is pretty impressive. There are quite a few apps already in the app store:

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/f...ppsfor_iphone/
post #23 of 129
Multipurposing these once-great print apps to export to the new-fangled online world seems like more opportunities for bloat, bragging rights, feature-creep, insanely complex code and crashes. I don't want a suite of Swiss-army knives! I need a suite of the best single-purpose knives I can own. I really like the Harry Potter-esqe world of having video in newspapers, magazines, billboards and books, but I don't think the technology is here to really allow us to print a newspaper or book like those that exist in the fantasy world.

I need a page design tool (InDesign) that is robust enough to handle a 500-page (or larger!) print job and not crash while exporting to PDF because it exceeds a 32-bit boundary.

I need an Illustrator that lets me develop illustrations that don't crash a RIP. Or mis-render in Photoshop because they crash a RIP.

And while I'm moaning and groaning, why can InDesign create beautiful typography while Illustrator makes text look worse than the trash created by Microsoft's word processor?

Am I a part of dieing breed of PRINT designers? Why do we need to "leverage" programs like InDesign into the virtual world just to "make things familiar"? I fully appreciate that Illustrator and Photoshop work exceedingly well in creating web graphics. But InDesign?

I'm not ready to accept extinction yet. Perhaps I just won't move beyond CS4 and all its inherent faults to use the few tools that really do work better than anything out there.

I guess I'm not the only one who's frustrated and has an increasingly hate-hate relationship with Adobe.
post #24 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"....It also appears that Adobe continues to miss the boat with HTML 5, and is focused almost exclusively on trying to get users to depend more on Flash even as the Web development community is looking elsewhere."

Wait.. what?? I thought Adobe was working something using HTML 5's canvas in CS5.: Video: Flash CS5 running on HTML 5's Canvas

Did they just scrap that project out?
post #25 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by waltsatan View Post

Whoever these people are, they aren't very familiar with iPhone compiling. It's very much working and is pretty impressive. There are quite a few apps already in the app store:

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/f...ppsfor_iphone/

I've tried these native flash apps and it works quite well since it compiled directly to machine code rather than being interpreted by a flash runtime player.
post #26 of 129
Please tell me, what is your workable substitute for The CS suite? I hear all the complaints, and most of them are justifiable, but is there another choice that actually works as well or better?

Curt
post #27 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomUnderhill View Post

I guess I'm not the only one who's frustrated and has an increasingly hate-hate relationship with Adobe.

Not by a long shot... The entire Creative Suite has been stagnant since about CS2 (or whenever they introduced Smart Objects). They've missed countless opportunities to improve the interface and consistency between apps, and the only difference I recall in CS4 vs. CS3 is that now I have to turn off even more crap in the preferences. Shadows? Really Adobe? You think I want to see all the images I'm working on surrounded by a fake shadow that isn't part of the image?

What a better position they would be in if they hadn't acquired Macromedia. Dreamweaver is irrelevant for web developers, hardly anyone knows what Fireworks is, and Flash is taking its last breath. If they had focused on their core products instead of using 3+ releases to "better integrate" with Macromedia's crap, we might actually like Adobe today.
post #28 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacCrazy View Post

Before coding a website I design it in InDesign first as it's a better program for laying out objects and experimenting with layouts, especially if I'm using a grid. The ability to have a preset for the web would be great, just as Illustrator does in CS4.

You're using a page layout application to design a website? Ha!

Try Fireworks.
post #29 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by CurtB2 View Post

Please tell me, what is your workable substitute for The CS suite? I hear all the complaints, and most of them are justifiable, but is there another choice that actually works as well or better?

Curt

There isn't one.
post #30 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluevoid View Post

Not by a long shot... The entire Creative Suite has been stagnant since about CS2 (or whenever they introduced Smart Objects). They've missed countless opportunities to improve the interface and consistency between apps, and the only difference I recall in CS4 vs. CS3 is that now I have to turn off even more crap in the preferences. Shadows? Really Adobe? You think I want to see all the images I'm working on surrounded by a fake shadow that isn't part of the image?

What a better position they would be in if they hadn't acquired Macromedia. Dreamweaver is irrelevant for web developers, hardly anyone knows what Fireworks is, and Flash is taking its last breath. If they had focused on their core products instead of using 3+ releases to "better integrate" with Macromedia's crap, we might actually like Adobe today.

Good point. Reminds me of when AMD bought out ATI. Now look at them? They've driven both brands into the ground. Fireworks seems to be overlapped by Illustrator. Flash was the only real product they wanted/needed from Macromedia. They should have let them keep the rest and just acquired Flash. Dreamweaver does have some benefits over other editors but I use it very very rarely. I prefer the less bloated editors.

CS5 should have a lower price point but I seriously doubt Adobe will do that. Snow Leopard was mostly under-the-hood changes and I think they were significant. I think its a massive improvement over Leopard in terms of daily usage and overall function. If CS5 has been completely re-written for native Cocoa and 64-bit. I believe it will be an equally great release. Many little annoyances I suspect will have been addressed and the overall performance increased. Being Cocoa based now, maybe it will even play nice with Spaces. Another thing that always bugged me was the inconsistency. Splash screens would be all over the screen (too hard to centre I guess) and the apps themselves were mixed, some with CS4 included, some without, some with Adobe included others without. How hard is it to name everything with a similar scheme and to centre the damn splash screens.

Anyone know if you can get into the beta for Photoshop CS5?
post #31 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluevoid View Post

Not by a long shot... The entire Creative Suite has been stagnant since about CS2 (or whenever they introduced Smart Objects). They've missed countless opportunities to improve the interface and consistency between apps, and the only difference I recall in CS4 vs. CS3 is that now I have to turn off even more crap in the preferences. Shadows? Really Adobe? You think I want to see all the images I'm working on surrounded by a fake shadow that isn't part of the image?

What a better position they would be in if they hadn't acquired Macromedia. Dreamweaver is irrelevant for web developers, hardly anyone knows what Fireworks is, and Flash is taking its last breath. If they had focused on their core products instead of using 3+ releases to "better integrate" with Macromedia's crap, we might actually like Adobe today.

That's what happens when you buy out your competition.. Not that macromedia was seriously competing with them. (Macromedia's stars were flash and dreamweaver and Adobe had everything else... now they just have everything)
post #32 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydewnd2 View Post

That's what happens when you buy out your competition.. Not that macromedia was seriously competing with them. (Macromedia's stars were flash and dreamweaver and Adobe had everything else... now they just have everything)

Ah Shiite here come the quark people
post #33 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2stepbay View Post

Aperture 3 is going to make some of Photoshop irrelevant (non destructive brushes etc) for photographers. PS5 is late in the game. Adobe continues to spin chaotically in the Mac realm. Jobs knows it too.

Photoshop has had a little thing called Camera Raw for years. Maybe you should try it.
post #34 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xero910 View Post

Good point. Reminds me of when AMD bought out ATI. Now look at them? They've driven both brands into the ground. Fireworks seems to be overlapped by Illustrator. Flash was the only real product they wanted/needed from Macromedia. They should have let them keep the rest and just acquired Flash. Dreamweaver does have some benefits over other editors but I use it very very rarely. I prefer the less bloated editors.

CS5 should have a lower price point but I seriously doubt Adobe will do that. Snow Leopard was mostly under-the-hood changes and I think they were significant. I think its a massive improvement over Leopard in terms of daily usage and overall function. If CS5 has been completely re-written for native Cocoa and 64-bit. I believe it will be an equally great release. Many little annoyances I suspect will have been addressed and the overall performance increased. Being Cocoa based now, maybe it will even play nice with Spaces. Another thing that always bugged me was the inconsistency. Splash screens would be all over the screen (too hard to centre I guess) and the apps themselves were mixed, some with CS4 included, some without, some with Adobe included others without. How hard is it to name everything with a similar scheme and to centre the damn splash screens.

Anyone know if you can get into the beta for Photoshop CS5?

CS5 is coming out in spring.
post #35 of 129
Yea but that could be late april-may. I'm a little anxious to try it. But spring is nice and close.
post #36 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

Figures.

I wish Lightroom would get just the pieces of Ps that the average photographer needs instead of trying to sell us both Lr and Ps (or CS Suite). For example, "retouching capability which makes it easier to remove objects from images" should also be in Lr. But that's Adobe in a nutshell, selling you tons of stuff you don't need or want to get the handful of stuff you care about.

I can't wait to see the Byzantine upgrade processes from a current CS product to the new round of CS bundles...

Sounds like you should try the Aperture 3 trial...
post #37 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

So even though CS4 was hardly different from CS3 and CS5 will be even less different than CS4 or CS3 ...

We still have to pay a thousand bucks for the privilege of using it, and then another thousand a year later when CS6 comes out? Seriously?

And Adobe wonders why no one likes their products anymore?

Let's see them give away these (long overdue and much asked for), "under the hood" improvements for 30 bucks like Apple did with Snow Leopard.

I'm sticking with CS3. Adobe will more than likely never offer anything that makes me upgrade. How sad.

Adobe = Rabid Stagnation
post #38 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2stepbay View Post

Aperture 3 is going to make some of Photoshop irrelevant (non destructive brushes etc) for photographers. PS5 is late in the game.

Until Aperture gets masks and layers, Ps is going to maintain the edge for certain types of work.

Aperture 3's nondestructive brushes is a good start, it just doesn't go far enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CIM View Post

Photoshop has had a little thing called Camera Raw for years. Maybe you should try it.

Meh. Not relevant for a thousand shots in a photoshoot. Or a library on an external drive that may not be attached today.

Lightroom is the more useful Adobe product for photographers. It gets you to maybe 90% of the solution. The problem is the cost of a full version of Ps for that last 10%.

Given what's already in the Lr 3 beta, I find Camera Raw less and less relevant. I'd buy Lr 4 with layers and masks in a heartbeat. Or Aperture 4 with layers and masks. But I have zero use for all the 3D crap they are apparently throwing into the new version of Ps.

The first company that figures that out is going to make a LOT of money...

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #39 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

Adobe software is utter crap, someone please step up and show these losers how to innovate and cooperate.

Please someone design an app that's not as bloated as Dreamweaver, Illustrator and Photoshop.

Oh.. someone already has...Pixelmator, Vector Designer and who needs Dreamweaver when you have Textmate and web standards.

Flash is dead. I do all of my banners and slideshows in javascript and use QT for movies.

Why on earth would I spend $600 for an CS5 upgrade?

3D? I use Cinema4D. I'm even using Motion 4 now instead of After Effects.

Again, Adobe is putting all of their eggs into the Flash basket. What a dumb ass move.

Ed
post #40 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

Until Aperture gets masks and layers, Ps is going to maintain the edge for certain types of work.

Aperture 3's nondestructive brushes is a good start, it just doesn't go far enough.


Meh. Not relevant for a thousand shots in a photoshoot. Or a library on an external drive that may not be attached today.

Lightroom is the more useful Adobe product for photographers. It gets you to maybe 90% of the solution. The problem is the cost of a full version of Ps for that last 10%.

Given what's already in the Lr 3 beta, I find Camera Raw less and less relevant. I'd buy Lr 4 with layers and masks in a heartbeat. Or Aperture 4 with layers and masks. But I have zero use for all the 3D crap they are apparently throwing into the new version of Ps.

The first company that figures that out is going to make a LOT of money...

Why would you need layers and masks in a non-destructive program like Lightroom?

You know there are variations of Photoshop without the 3D crap.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Sources offer peek at Adobe Creative Suite 5 for Mac