or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe to officially unveil Creative Suite 5 for Mac April 12
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe to officially unveil Creative Suite 5 for Mac April 12

post #1 of 74
Thread Starter 
Adobe on Tuesday revealed that its forthcoming Creative Suite 5 package for graphic, video and Web design professionals, including the debut of Photoshop for Mac as a 64-bit application, will be unveiled on April 12, and will ship about a month later.

For the April 12 introduction, Adobe will begin accepting preorders and has scheduled a launch event for CS5 at 11 a.m. Eastern. The event will be streamed on AdobeTV, allowing users the ability to see the features of the product. It is then the company will also announce its price and details.

The company's CS5 launch Web site has been outfitted with a clock counting down the days until users can get their first official look at CS5. A handful of "sneak peek videos" are also available.

Adobe Systems Inc. announced the date during its quarterly earnings report Tuesday, in which the company revealed its profits fell 19 percent in its fiscal first quarter. But Chief Executive Shantanu Narayen said the company expects better results next quarter, which will feature the debut of the latest Creative Suite.

"We will be giving many more details of CS5's features, functionality and pricing on April 12 with shipping of the English version about four weeks later," Narayan said with analysts Tuesday, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Investors are said to be optimistic about Adobe's next quarter, as CS5 is expected to outperform its predecessor. CS5 for Mac will feature a new version of the Photoshop graphics editor rewritten in Apple's 64-bit object-oriented Cocoa framework. The Windows version of Photoshop went 64-bit in 2008 with CS4.

Flash CS5, codenamed Viper, marks a new strategy for adobe in trying to maintain relevance among mobile developers. The latest version will give developers the ability to output native iPhone apps from existing Flash-related assets for release on Apple's App Store. Adobe will offer the porting feature in response to Apple's refusal to support Flash as a Web plugin runtime on the iPhone OS.

For more coverage, see AppleInsider's exclusive look at CS5 from February, in "Sources offer peek at Adobe Creative Suite 5 for Mac."



Also this week, Adobe released a second beta of Photoshop Lightroom 3, its photography software platform for Mac OS X and Windows. The company said more than 350,000 users have downloaded the first Lightroom 3 beta thus far.

"We've worked on improving several key areas and have prepared a second public beta of Lightroom 3 as we get closer to our final release," the company said. "Because this public beta is closer to our final release we are more focused on receiving feedback on the improvements we've made since the original public beta. And more importantly, by utilizing broader testing from a larger community of photographers we can help ensure that you can trust the quality of the final Lightroom 3.0 release."

The latest beta of Lightroom 3 features improved performance, faster loading of images, and native tethered shooting support for select Nikon and Canon DSLR cameras.

While other Adobe products will receive the 64-bit treatment with CS5, Photoshop Lightroom 2 was the company's first 64-bit application back in July of 2008.
post #2 of 74
I trust that I am not looking at another six hundred bucks or more to upgrade. 64-bit is what we expected for CS4. This had better be a much cheaper upgrade or we better be seeing many, many major new features.

Well?
post #3 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

... CS5 for Mac will feature a new version of the Photoshop graphics editor rewritten in Apple's 64-bit object-oriented Cocoa framework. ....

I'm almost certain that this is not true or at least deeply misleading to put it that way.

The way I heard it they are re-writing it in 64 bit, but *not* using Cocoa development tools or any of the Cocoa UI stuff. AFAIK they are also sticking with their own UI conventions, thumbing the nose at Mac users again, and using the same Flash-based crap for the panels and toolbars.

Just for fun, I predict:

It will have just enough differences to force you to upgrade, yet basically be the same product.
The menu items and the keyboard shortcuts will all be completely re-organised for apparently no reason, (but still won't use any of the Mac conventions.)
  • It will still crash a lot and suck up resources like there's no tomorrow
  • It will still not recognise "spaces" on the Mac
  • It will still install many many gigabytes of unnecessary files
  • It will still install tens of thousands of tiny text files in the system library
  • The installer will still suck, and still use that tech from the early 90's
Most importantly:

It will still cost between 800 and a 1000 dollars for the full suite after taxes

post #4 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I'm almost certain that this is not true or at least deeply misleading to put it that way.

The way I heard it they are re-writing it in 64 bit, but *not* using Cocoa development tools or any of the Cocoa UI stuff. AFAIK they are also sticking with their own UI conventions, thumbing the nose at Mac users again, and using the same Flash-based crap for the panels and toolbars.

Just for fun, I predict:

It will have just enough differences to force you to upgrade, yet basically be the same product.
The menu items and the keyboard shortcuts will all be completely re-organised for apparently no reason, (but still won't use any of the Mac conventions.)
  • It will still crash a lot and suck up resources like there's no tomorrow
  • It will still not recognise "spaces" on the Mac
  • It will still install many many gigabytes of unnecessary files
  • It will still install tens of thousands of tiny text files in the system library
  • The installer will still suck, and still use that tech from the early 90's
Most importantly:

It will still cost between 800 and a 1000 dollars for the full suite after taxes


Exaggerate much?

I think CS4 rocks. I have no problems at all and I use it non-stop everyday.
I really can't figure out what your problem is. Is it something personal with Adobe?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #5 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Exaggerate much?

I think CS4 rocks. I have no problems at all and I use it non-stop everyday.
I really can't figure out what your problem is. Is it something personal with Adobe?

No exaggeration.

Used PShop since version 3.0 on Windows. Used every version of the CS suite. Had the same issues with every version. Just because you like it and don't have problems with the awful design of the thing doesn't mean everyone else feels the same.

If I'm honest I would say it's probably true that I have a teeny tiny bit of a *hate* on for Adobe as a company, but it's not unreasoned or uninformed. It's based on years and years of using their products. It's also based on years of using competitors products and seeing them bought up by Adobe, ruined or eliminated, and being forced to use Adobe's alternative. Freehand was, and probably still, is a much better vector design tool for instance. Who uses it now? Most people haven't even heard of it.

The things I mentioned in my first post are mostly just the first five or six grievances that came to mind while I was typing. These are real grievances that vex me on a daily basis since I use CS4 on a daily basis.

CS4 on the Mac is a croaking piece of shite that should be mothballed. CS5 will have to be half the price or ten times as good to justify purchasing it. I just kind of doubt that either of those will be true when they finally reveal it, but I'll probably have to buy it anyway, and use it anyway.

If all of that isn't justification for being p*ssed off at Adobe, I don't know what would be.
post #6 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

CS4 on the Mac is a croaking piece of shite that should be mothballed. CS5 will have to be half the price or ten times as good to justify purchasing it. I just kind of doubt that either of those will be true when they finally reveal it, but I'll probably have to buy it anyway, and use it anyway.

It is a poor craftsperson who blames their tools. As a professional, if a tool is unacceptable, it is still unacceptable at half the price. Find a better tool and use that instead or if no satisfactory tool exists make one yourself.

Good luck with that hatred.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #7 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

If all of that isn't justification for being p*ssed off at Adobe, I don't know what would be.

I'm a lifer Adobe user as well and, for what it's worth, I'm 100% with you on this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

It is a poor craftsperson who blames their tools. As a professional, if a tool is unacceptable, it is still unacceptable at half the price. Find a better tool and use that instead or if no satisfactory tool exists make one yourself.

Good call. Because there are so many other options than the Creative Suite. So many different programs that you can use and then easily pass files off to other graphic designers or to printers, or that have had the chance to mature and become real competitors before Adobe bought and shut them down. No, but you're right, if we're frustrated with Adobe, we should make a better tool ourselves. I mean, that's why I went into graphic design: my profoundly excellent programming skills. Can't imagine why this option didn't occur to me already...
post #8 of 74
Just curious if there has been any official comment from Apple on iPhone executable code by third-party apps, and specifically flash.
post #9 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkpdev View Post

Apple decides not to allow non-Xcode generated App's in the app store?

Seems to me that you are not sure of what you are talking about.
post #10 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkpdev View Post

Apple decides not to allow non-Xcode generated App's in the app store?


Complied application assembly language doesn't have "Made with Xcode" stamped on it. A compiler is a complier. Apple uses xcode and then gcc to compile it into an iPhone compatible executable. Adobe uses Flash and then compiles it into an iPhone executable.

If they both produce the exact the same end result, on what grounds should they be rejected?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #11 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by too999 View Post

Seems to me that you are not sure of what you are talking about.

I completely agree, which is why I posed the question (to garner other opinions and insight). It was my understanding that Apple could reject whatever they wanted from the App Store and if they decided they didn't want Adobe products being used to generate applications for the App Store it was within their right/privilege to do so.

If this has already been addressed by Apple (the prospect of third-party tools being used to develop applications they approve of) then I apologize for the ignorance in my question.
post #12 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Complied application assembly language doesn't have "Made with Xcode" stamped on it. A compiler is a complier. Apple uses xcode and then gcc to compile it into an iPhone compatible executable. Adobe uses Flash and then compiles it into an iPhone executable.

If they both produce the exact the same end result, on what grounds should they be rejected?

Apple has recently increased the threshold for what they deem acceptable apps based on content, and more recently it's been suggested on function (removal of web site apps), I guess to my thinking it isn't a stretch to think they may extend that threshhold to third-party tools (and especially Flash created ones which they have most recently been very strongly targeting with their comments, etc).

Was just a thought that I had and I thought I'd see what people thought about it. Definitely didn't intend to touch a nerve or annoy with the thought.
post #13 of 74
WARNING WILL ROBINSON!!!

The link in the AI article

Quote:
The company's CS5 launch Web site has been outfitted...


Does not go directly to Adobe's website. Instead the link is this:

http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-1989299-10766175


The reputation of the site above is in very poor standards for some reason as you can see here:

http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/tkqlhce.com


Part of the ValueClick / Commission Junction IP 216.34.209.0 - 216.34.209.31
post #14 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by too999 View Post

Seems to me that you are not sure of what you are talking about.

he's talking about Flash is if you read between the lines
post #15 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I'm almost certain that this is not true or at least deeply misleading to put it that way.

The way I heard it they are re-writing it in 64 bit, but *not* using Cocoa development tools or any of the Cocoa UI stuff. AFAIK they are also sticking with their own UI conventions, thumbing the nose at Mac users again, and using the same Flash-based crap for the panels and toolbars.

Just for fun, I predict:

It will have just enough differences to force you to upgrade, yet basically be the same product.
The menu items and the keyboard shortcuts will all be completely re-organised for apparently no reason, (but still won't use any of the Mac conventions.)
  • It will still crash a lot and suck up resources like there's no tomorrow
  • It will still not recognise "spaces" on the Mac
  • It will still install many many gigabytes of unnecessary files
  • It will still install tens of thousands of tiny text files in the system library
  • The installer will still suck, and still use that tech from the early 90's
Most importantly:

It will still cost between 800 and a 1000 dollars for the full suite after taxes


Completely agree 100%. I too have used PS since 3.0 and was thrilled when Adobe finally gave Quark something to quake about when InDesign actually started to be a realistic alternative to Xpress, but have been totally disgusted with them ever since they vomited their craptastic "Creative Suite"

With very few exceptions, there has been nothing worth upgrading for except for "native" versions. I upgraded to the first OS X "native" version of PS and AI, and then again with CS3 so I could have a "native" Intel version and have only watch what used to be wonderful design tools turn into bloated, buggy, inconsistent wastes of money. I make my living with their sh*t software and every day curse the fact that there are no real alternatives to PS, AI or In and Adobe has been exploiting that fact for many years.

I loathe Adobe and the utter disgust they have for their Mac user base.
post #16 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

64-bit is what we expected for CS4.

That was entirely Apple's fault. They promised 64 bit Carbon then yanked it at the last minute, waiting until WWDC even though the decision was likely made well before that, forcing developers to start from scratch. For all the hype Apple has given Cocoa, all of their pro apps (except Aperture) were still Carbon until a year ago. Since Windows' developer roadmap isn't tied to its CEO's mood swings, 64 bit was delivered on Windows first.
post #17 of 74
Unless they are going to pull out some considerable new features we don't know about, I don't think panoramic stitching and a new brush tool is going to convince people to slap down $1200 in this economy.

As a matter of fact, it's so underwhelming that I don't even want to bother going through the hassle of installing it.

There are 2 problems with productivity on the Mac - Microsoft and Adobe. Neither "get it".
post #18 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonefree View Post

That was entirely Apple's fault. They promised 64 bit Carbon then yanked it at the last minute, waiting until WWDC even though the decision was likely made well before that, forcing developers to start from scratch. For all the hype Apple has given Cocoa, all of their pro apps (except Aperture) were still Carbon until a year ago. Since Windows' developer roadmap isn't tied to its CEO's mood swings, 64 bit was delivered on Windows first.

i think all the sign posts on that roadmap pointed to cocoa since osx was released.
that was when? 10 years ago?

i'm curious who the other developers were that were caught by the cancellation of 64 bit carbon. i seem to remember that adobe was the only one that couldn't read the map.

as for windows roadmaps being so much more predictable: remember cairo? longhorn? winmo?
post #19 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkpdev View Post

I completely agree, which is why I posed the question (to garner other opinions and insight). It was my understanding that Apple could reject whatever they wanted from the App Store and if they decided they didn't want Adobe products being used to generate applications for the App Store it was within their right/privilege to do so.

If this has already been addressed by Apple (the prospect of third-party tools being used to develop applications they approve of) then I apologize for the ignorance in my question.

i remember reading that there are already a few apps in the store that were made by compiling flash with adobe's new tool. i wouldn't worry about it.
post #20 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally View Post

Completely agree 100%. I too have used PS since 3.0 and was thrilled when Adobe finally gave Quark something to quake about when InDesign actually started to be a realistic alternative to Xpress, but have been totally disgusted with them ever since they vomited their craptastic "Creative Suite"

With very few exceptions, there has been nothing worth upgrading for except for "native" versions. I upgraded to the first OS X "native" version of PS and AI, and then again with CS3 so I could have a "native" Intel version and have only watch what used to be wonderful design tools turn into bloated, buggy, inconsistent wastes of money. I make my living with their sh*t software and every day curse the fact that there are no real alternatives to PS, AI or In and Adobe has been exploiting that fact for many years.

I loathe Adobe and the utter disgust they have for their Mac user base.

Couldn't agree more - but I'll try

Picked up PS3 as inducement to purchase top of the range UMAX, great scanner and great software.
Worked my way up thru to Ps8 and then CS3 ('web design premium' no less WFT?),
wasn't entirely happy with CS3 at first and then began to find all the little 'add-ons'.
Then with Snow Leopard in 64bit (I know, my bad) on a pre IPS 24" 'maxed-out' iMac it became a nightmare of crashes.
Used in 32bit it ran better, however I've been turning to Ps8 (CS) often, as I find ImageReady
one of the best all round utility Apps I have - and it's only typical of Adobe to drop it!

So I didn't bother with CS4, happy I didn't and if Gazobee is proved correct, Adobe can shove CS5 up there with it.
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #21 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally View Post

Completely agree 100%. I too have used PS since 3.0 and was thrilled when Adobe finally gave Quark something to quake about when InDesign actually started to be a realistic alternative to Xpress, but have been totally disgusted with them ever since they vomited their craptastic "Creative Suite"

With very few exceptions, there has been nothing worth upgrading for except for "native" versions. I upgraded to the first OS X "native" version of PS and AI, and then again with CS3 so I could have a "native" Intel version and have only watch what used to be wonderful design tools turn into bloated, buggy, inconsistent wastes of money. I make my living with their sh*t software and every day curse the fact that there are no real alternatives to PS, AI or In and Adobe has been exploiting that fact for many years.

I loathe Adobe and the utter disgust they have for their Mac user base.

I tend to agree with you. sad really. i've been using photoshop and illustrator since versions 1.0 and i'm disappointed to see how much my 'bread & butter tools' have descended into bloatware.

my favourite version of illustrator is still version 10, mainly because it was the last version that properly maps keyboard shortcuts when you use the dvorak layout. it does however also run circles around all the later versions, despite running in rosetta.

i dread the day when it gets broken by a new version of osx. so far so good in snow leopard. adobe doesn't even support CS3 in 10.6 anymore.
post #22 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkpdev View Post

Just curious if there has been any official comment from Apple on iPhone executable code by third-party apps, and specifically flash.

Yes, flash sucks and they aren't going to implement it. Thank god! Move on...
post #23 of 74
Having skipped the "upgrade" to CS4 as it would have cost our 2-person company $1200, my only question is: how much?

I don't care about improvements as I sure there are some.

I just care about the cost.
post #24 of 74
Hope they continue to sell Adobe Dreamweaver CS5 as a replacement to Adobe Dreamweaver CS4:
http://store.apple.com/us/product/TT...co=MTY3ODQ5OTY I don't need the entire suite for likely more than $1,000!

Presently, I am using Dreamweaver 8, part of Studio 8, Education on my PB G4, 10.4.11.

This summer, when the New iPhone and New MBPs are out, I'll buy those, and I wonder if my Dreamweaver 8, part of Studio 8, will run on the latest Snow Leopard, so I can use it on both laptops, MBP + PB G4 10.4.11?

That Dreamweaver 8 does all I need it to do, so I'd be perfectly happy staying with that, and use it on my next MBP! If yes, then I'd be saving myself $399 + Tax !

Anyone knows anything about that? Hope to hear from you! Thanks in advance!

 

Go  Apple, AAPL!!!

Reply

 

Go  Apple, AAPL!!!

Reply
post #25 of 74
Just Got CS4
post #26 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by vercordio View Post

I'm a lifer Adobe user as well and, for what it's worth, I'm 100% with you on this.



Good call. Because there are so many other options than the Creative Suite. So many different programs that you can use and then easily pass files off to other graphic designers or to printers, or that have had the chance to mature and become real competitors before Adobe bought and shut them down. No, but you're right, if we're frustrated with Adobe, we should make a better tool ourselves. I mean, that's why I went into graphic design: my profoundly excellent programming skills. Can't imagine why this option didn't occur to me already...

Ouch! I cut my finger on your post! Seriously though, you make some valid points. It seems that a lot of us Adobe veterans are appalled (but not surprised) on what has happened to the one time "beloved" Apple developer. Being a PS user since 2.0 I saw some fantastic things that Adobe brought to Mac users and it was a great time until Windows 95 came out. With the amount of Mac users jumping ship over to Windows (like rats on a sinking ship), Adobe decided to put Photoshop on the PC. The first version was a complete POS, but to Adobe's amazement, it sold pretty well. Thus began the focus on making the Windows versions better and giving their loyal Mac users the big screw you. I remember the senior programmers making statements that "The Mac platform is dead." and for us remaining Mac users to "Get over it." Then things got really bad when Apple brought out Final Cut Pro and Adobe dropped Premiere and no one really cared. The worst is when they swallowed Macromedia (formerly Aldus). Then they just didn't care what anybody thought, they owned the whole creative enchilada.

Today it's just rehashed crap for big dollars since Adobe still thinks its the 90's and can get 600 bucks for software that should be about 200. But hey there's nobody else to compete with them and where you gonna go, huh? And that's pretty much what Quark used to think.

I guess history does repeat itself.
post #27 of 74
CS has gotten steadily worse over the years. How about a decent OS X interface, Adobe?

Oh wait, that's right, this is Adobe we're talking about.
post #28 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

CS has gotten steadily worse over the years. How about a decent OS X interface, Adobe?

Oh wait, that's right, this is Adobe we're talking about.



What? You don't like it?

I just hope Apple doesn't go the same route with their interface changes. You know, dumb it down some more, or make it all purty and kill your cpu doing it.
post #29 of 74
Once we thought no one could ever exceed Microsoft's mastery of the blivet market. Then Adobe came along and sold 10 lbs of excrement in a 5 lb bag for three times the price, and blew us all away.

Their endless, pointless mastication of their own product is closer to copraphilia than engineering.
post #30 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

It is a poor craftsperson who blames their tools. As a professional, if a tool is unacceptable, it is still unacceptable at half the price. Find a better tool and use that instead or if no satisfactory tool exists make one yourself.

Good luck with that hatred.

right. unless you got really used to the awesome hammer that the Amazing Tool Company made.

you know the one that only made left handed hammers that were clearly the best. luckily you were lefthanded, so that wasn't a problem. you were glad you were able to use the best hammer there was and finally being lefthanded was a reason you could build the best houses out there. more and more lefthanded people bought the hammers and the Amazing Tool Company was very successful.

there was another company that made left handed hammers too. you had one of theirs as well, and for a while each of the companies kept making their hammers better and better.

then one day the Amazing Tool Company bought the other lefthanded tool company, only to discontinue their line of hammers. that wasn't too bad, they still made your favourite hammer. so every year or two you bought a new one because the old one wouldn't fit into your new toolbelt any more. then one year the Amazing Tool Company discovered that there were many more right handed people out there and decided they were going to make other tools as well.

you were okay with that, because you could still get your favourite hammer, even though they started to package them with saws, and pliers and strange little gadgets like nailclippers and bifocals. that was still okay - you didn't need the nailclippers, but the saw was good too, and the pliers came in handy at times.

you did notice that they didn't quite fit your hand any more. it seemed as if they had made it for right handed people. one year their new model got released for righthanded people a year before they made it for their hardcore lefties. you waited a year and then discovered that it wasn't really worth the money you paid for. you had no choice. your toolbelt was new and the hammer needed to fit.

you looked around for a different company, but the Amazing Tool Company had been so successful that nobody made a really great hammer any more. on top of that, nobody made a hammer that worked with all the nails you had.

then one year you found their lefthanded hammers got discontinued. all they made now were swiss army knifes for righthanded people. every other year you could buy a lefthanded version that looked like it been ported by outsourced righties by looking in a mirror.

but - good news! finally it came with a toothpick and a tiny corkscrew that you didn't even know you needed! was it worth a thousand bucks? probably not.

but what else are you gonna do with all those nails?
post #31 of 74
Like the UI generally, have been using Photoshop since 1.0, and Illustrator since "88" (yes, version 88, you'll probably have to look that up).

I think they're good products, I just wish Adobe cared a little more. As professional tools go, CS3 was a little buggy, and they crash every time I try to quit them to shut down.

I don't mind paying for the tools we use, but it's hard to justify the expence when we just bought everyone CS3 a year and a half ago.

Does anyone know what the cost implications are for skipping the CS4 upgrade? There's just no way we're going to upgrade every single time.
post #32 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

...

but what else are you gonna do with all those nails?

Great post Tofino Dead F'ing On!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbryanh View Post

Once we thought no one could ever exceed Microsoft's mastery of the blivet market. Then Adobe came along and sold 10 lbs of excrement in a 5 lb bag for three times the price, and blew us all away.

Their endless, pointless mastication of their own product is closer to copraphilia than engineering.

Close second rbryonh!

Just yesterday, on a short minute-by-minute deadline, I had Illustrator (CS4) crap-n-crash on me 2 times for no apparent reason, and that on a "light" project change. I left my desk before I blew up and through my Wacom pen like a dart through my beloved Eizo... searched for my famous understanding cat to kick around, or at least hear me say, "I'm quiting this damn business as a designer!". The tools SUCK! And NO "mstone", there IS no alternative any more, as others have said. That's what makes it all the more frustrating!

I've been using Adobe products since version 1 of everything, as well as just about every other graphic program ever released, including those from Macromedia (Aldus), specifically FreeHand, for well over 20 years now. I've trained countless hundreds (1000's?) and consult on a daily basis as well within the graphic and printing industry. I must truly admit, that none of my clients have seen me so downright skeptical and depressed over the last year or so, over the future of our businesses. As my colleague said to me after finally getting the project out to him, "It's just not fun any more".

I realize nothing is "fun anymore"... but regardless of the stress in the industry and with business in general, we as designers could always kick back, rely on, and have some fun with our machines and tools.

I am seriously "praying" that Adobe has at least fixed the bugs and immensely boosted the performance of the CS5-Suite. At this point... I'll pay a pretty penny just for that... not gladly... but I'll pay just to keep my sanity and my business intact. Just try to stay positive I guess...\
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #33 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I'm almost certain that this is not true or at least deeply misleading to put it that way.

The way I heard it they are re-writing it in 64 bit, but *not* using Cocoa development tools or any of the Cocoa UI stuff. AFAIK they are also sticking with their own UI conventions, thumbing the nose at Mac users again, and using the same Flash-based crap for the panels and toolbars.

Just for fun, I predict:

It will have just enough differences to force you to upgrade, yet basically be the same product.
The menu items and the keyboard shortcuts will all be completely re-organised for apparently no reason, (but still won't use any of the Mac conventions.)
  • It will still crash a lot and suck up resources like there's no tomorrow
  • It will still not recognise "spaces" on the Mac
  • It will still install many many gigabytes of unnecessary files
  • It will still install tens of thousands of tiny text files in the system library
  • The installer will still suck, and still use that tech from the early 90's
Most importantly:

It will still cost between 800 and a 1000 dollars for the full suite after taxes


Hey Gazoobee... I hope you are sooo wrong... but why am I agreeing with your post and preparing myself for your predictions to be true..?
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #34 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

i think all the sign posts on that roadmap pointed to cocoa since osx was released.
that was when? 10 years ago?

i'm curious who the other developers were that were caught by the cancellation of 64 bit carbon. i seem to remember that adobe was the only one that couldn't read the map.

as for windows roadmaps being so much more predictable: remember cairo? longhorn? winmo?

Right I forgot how Apple was taking the lead by porting Final Cut, Logic Pro, and their other pro apps to Cocoaer nevermind. Final Cut still isn't Cocoa. Logic just became so.

Besides if the roadmap was so clear why did Apple say they would do 64 bit Carbon? Why did they wait until WWDC to announce their reversal? Surely the decision was made at least weeks ago. I know of at least one other developer, Steinberg, makers of pro audio software, who expressed frustration at Apple's actions, which rendered months of hard work obsolete.

The Windows roadmaps were much more long term. I don't think any developer was ever encouraged to start writing prematurely for those platforms. I think they were just vaporware for MS to try to show people that they're actually working on something.
post #35 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by disposableidentity View Post

Like the UI generally, have been using Photoshop since 1.0, and Illustrator since "88" (yes, version 88, you'll probably have to look that up).

I think they're good products, I just wish Adobe cared a little more. As professional tools go, CS3 was a little buggy, and they crash every time I try to quit them to shut down.

I don't mind paying for the tools we use, but it's hard to justify the expence when we just bought everyone CS3 a year and a half ago.

Does anyone know what the cost implications are for skipping the CS4 upgrade? There's just no way we're going to upgrade every single time.

Illustrator 88 FTW! Kerning!! w00t!!!

i'd gladly pay for a useful feature.
and finally a reason to switch back from freehand!
post #36 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonefree View Post

Right I forgot how Apple was taking the lead by porting Final Cut, Logic Pro, and their other pro apps to Cocoaer nevermind. Final Cut still isn't Cocoa. Logic just became so.

Besides if the roadmap was so clear why did Apple say they would do 64 bit Carbon? Why did they wait until WWDC to announce their reversal? Surely the decision was made at least weeks ago. I know of at least one other developer, Steinberg, makers of pro audio software, who expressed frustration at Apple's actions, which rendered months of hard work obsolete.

The Windows roadmaps were much more long term. I don't think any developer was ever encouraged to start writing prematurely for those platforms. I think they were just vaporware for MS to try to show people that they're actually working on something.

you're right. nothing is ever as black and white as we make it sound. apple has taken its time on some of their apps. while final cut and logic pro are probably even more niche than adobe's high end programs, there is no excuse for things like the finder.

i don't know how apple and adobe's engineering staff compares - software engineers that is. i do however think that apple is getting close to the finish line for their product line, which included a few os updates in the last ten years.

transitions take time. is final cut the last one? how much of adobe's mac product line is done? and is it really 'entirely apple's fault'?

i'm sorry to hear there were casualties along the way, like Steinberg. nobody likes waisting months of work. but this wasn't a widespread problem was it?

now - i'm also wondering how many of the windows mobile developers found the spot on their long term roadmap from microsoft, that could have told them it was going to be a rather abrupt dead end.
post #37 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

you're right. nothing is ever as black and white as we make it sound. apple has taken its time on some of their apps. while final cut and logic pro are probably even more niche than adobe's high end programs, there is no excuse for things like the finder.

i don't know how apple and adobe's engineering staff compares - software engineers that is. i do however think that apple is getting close to the finish line for their product line, which included a few os updates in the last ten years.

transitions take time. is final cut the last one? how much of adobe's mac product line is done? and is it really 'entirely apple's fault'?

i'm sorry to hear there were casualties along the way, like Steinberg. nobody likes waisting months of work. but this wasn't a widespread problem was it?

now - i'm also wondering how many of the windows mobile developers found the spot on their long term roadmap from microsoft, that could have told them it was going to be a rather abrupt dead end.

Even iTunes is still Carbon. It's really in need of a rewrite as it's become slower and more bloated with every release.

I don't think the 64 bit transition was a widespread problem simply because very few apps have a pressing need to switch to 64 bit. But for pro audio, video, graphic design, etc there is a big advantage, one that become more obvious as RAM prices continue to drop. Not sure how much of CS5 will be 64 bit besides Photoshop. Probably Premiere Pro, especially since it was a rewrite and was likely already Cocoa. Whether it's "entirely Apple's fault" - for Photoshop I think it was. If Apple had either stuck to their promise of 64 bit Carbon or announced well in advance that 64 bit apps must be Cocoa, PS CS4 would have likely been 64 bit. I'm kind of curious why they did promise 64 bit Carbon though.
post #38 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

I trust that I am not looking at another six hundred bucks or more to upgrade. 64-bit is what we expected for CS4. This had better be a much cheaper upgrade or we better be seeing many, many major new features.

Well?

Oh, boo hoo you cry baby.

Upgrading 8 professional programs for $600, is that too much for the cry baby? $60 per program?

Did you wet your pants when the iWork upgrade cost $80? Did you fall out of your crib when the Aperture uprade cost $200? DId you vomit all over your money when you found out the FInal Cut upgrade cost $300? Did you throw a temper tantrum when the Logic upgrade cost $200?

Or are you just generally a whiner who would illegally download Creative suite even if it was only $20 a program???
post #39 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by disposableidentity View Post


I think they're good products, I just wish Adobe cared a little more. As professional tools go, CS3 was a little buggy, and they crash every time I try to quit them to shut down.

That's funny, since the cracked version floating around the internet had that problem a few years ago, and was actually addressed on the Adobe Website as being a problem with pirated software... Maybe you should just wish that your grandma gave you the money to buy them for xmas
post #40 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by davebarnes View Post

Having skipped the "upgrade" to CS4 as it would have cost our 2-person company $1200, my only question is: how much?

I don't care about improvements as I sure there are some.

I just care about the cost.

Sounds like your company is some sort of Walmart "fuck quality, we just care about the cost" kind of setup. Congrats on your crapulence.

It amazes me how many "designers" are bellyaching about the cost, when a $600 upgrade can be recouped in about a day's work by any decent designer. I think $300 per year (if Adobe updates every 2 years) for a vital and excellent suite of professional programs is totally fine. And you guys who are "pros" can deduct the whole thing as a business expense anyways, so it ends up costing you even less. Maybe a proper system to run the suite averages $600 per year to maintain on top of that, so you're at $900 a year in main business expenses. Whoopdie fucking doo.

Compare that to a truck driver, dentist, construction contractor, musician, photographer, etc when they have to upgrade, and you'll be surprised how cheap it is to be a designer who uses Adobe products.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe to officially unveil Creative Suite 5 for Mac April 12