or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe releases Creative Suite 5.5 with iPad support for Photoshop
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe releases Creative Suite 5.5 with iPad support for Photoshop

post #1 of 34
Thread Starter 
Adobe on Tuesday released Creative Suite 5.5, the mid-cycle upgrade for its creative applications, with new features and functionality, including iPad applications for operating photoshop and subscription pricing.

Creative Suite 5.5 can now be purchased from Adobe, with upgrade pricing for CS5.5 Design Premium available for $399, and the CS5.5 Master Collection available for $549 for upgraders. New CS5.5 subscriptions also allow customers to pay as they go, with Photoshop and InDesign available separately for $35-per-month on a one-year plan.

Creative Suite 5.5 arrives along with three new iPad applications used to drive common Photoshop workflows: Adobe Color Lava, Adobe Eazel and Adobe Nav. These are designed to enable users to create custom swatches, and paint and drive popular Photoshop tools from tablet devices.

Adobe has also issued the Photoshop Touch Software Development Kit, which allows developers to create mobile and tablet applications that interact with Adobe Photoshop CS5 and Photoshop CS5 Extended software. The Photoshop Touch SDK and new scripting engine allow Android, BlackBerry Tablet OS and iOS applications to drive an interact with Photoshop on the desktop.

"Adobe is leading the charge for HTML5 authoring with new capabilities in Creative Suite 5.5 that will radically enhance the delivery of HTML content across multiple browsers -- on the desktop, tablets and smartphones," said David Wadhwani, senior vice president and general manager for Creative and Interactive Solutions at Adobe. "For creators of mobile apps on iOS, Android or BlackBerry Tablet OS, our latest Flash tools deliver stunning high-performance apps, without having to start from scratch for every device."



Adobe is also pushing Creative Suite 5.5 as the start of a "new era in digital publishing," allowing business publishers to create print and digital versions of their properties for the latest tablet devices, including Apple's iPad.

Using Adobe InDesign CS 5.5, in combination with the integrated Folio Producer toolset, designers can add new levels of interactivity to their page layouts targeted at tablet devices. Also available is the Adobe Digital Publishing suite, a turnkey solution that includes hosted services and viewer technology that allow publishers to cost-effectively publish content to Android tablets, BlackBerry PlayBook and Apple iPad.



The new Creative Suite product lineup is headlined by Adobe Creative Suite 5.5 Master Collection, which includes, in a single package, all of Adobes creative tools, such as Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Acrobat, Flash Builder Premium, Flash Catalyst, Flash Professional, Dreamweaver, Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects. These products are available separately or as components of one or more of the five Creative Suite editions.

The complete Creative Suite 5 lineup includes Creative Suite 5.5 Master Collection, Creative Suite 5.5 Design Premium, Creative Suite 5.5 Web Premium, Creative Suite 5.5 Production Premium and Creative Suite 5.5 Design Standard.

Adobe Creative Suite 5.5 products are immediately available through Adobe Authorized Resellers, the Adobe Store online in North America and Adobe Direct Sales. Estimated street price for the suites is US$2599 for CS5.5 Master Collection, US$1899 for CS5.5 Design Premium, US$1799 for CS5.5 Web Premium, US$1699 for CS5.5 Production Premium and US$1299 for CS5.5 Design Standard. Upgrade pricing and volume licensing are available.
post #2 of 34
iPad Support! I might just give Adobe a second chance.
post #3 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach View Post

iPad Support! I might just give Adobe a second chance.

Just be aware that it isn't anything close to the full photoshop app. These are tool bar apps that only work with photoshop, not on their own.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #4 of 34
No, it's not the full Photoshop. But just look how much you can do without Flash.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #5 of 34
Adobe is a company that makes great tools, especially for designers and the like.

The problem was that they had this crazy Microsoftian idea where they could also usurp the internet, and make it a Flash enclave.

The quicker they get rid of their "world domination" plans, and the faster they return to their roots, the better off they will be.

Its the Macromedia in Adobe that is hurting them.
post #6 of 34
It's a start...

The iPad as a control surface for a complex app running on a Mac.

I hope we see more of this when FCPX is released.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #7 of 34
This upgrade is ridiculous if not arrogant. I will wait for 6.
post #8 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

Adobe is a company that makes great tools, especially for designers and the like.

The problem was that they had this crazy Microsoftian idea where they could also usurp the internet, and make it a Flash enclave.

The quicker they get rid of their "world domination" plans, and the faster they return to their roots, the better off they will be.

Its the Macromedia in Adobe that is hurting them.

Do you guys honestly believe this nonsense?

Flash and Flash Player are responsible for a huge amount of the interactivity and multimedia content that has been on the web in the past 10+ years. Without it, we'd have a far less rich internet and massive fragmentation of plugins and media players.

I doubt anyone at Adobe or Macromedia set out for "world domination" - they produced a truly excellent product that became popular because of how good it was.

If you'd like to suggest an alternative technology that can deliver what the combination of Flash and Flash Player do, please enlighten us all.
post #9 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

Do you guys honestly believe this nonsense?

Flash and Flash Player are responsible for a huge amount of the interactivity and multimedia content that has been on the web in the past 10+ years. Without it, we'd have a far less rich internet and massive fragmentation of plugins and media players.

Yeah, like annoying flash ads.
Quote:
I doubt anyone at Adobe or Macromedia set out for "world domination" - they produced a truly excellent product that became popular because of how good it was.

If you'd like to suggest an alternative technology that can deliver what the combination of Flash and Flash Player do, please enlighten us all.

I get that Flash has brought capabilities to the web that we'd have not gotten elsewhere, except for video. Flash was late to the video game and only brought some security, forced ad watching, etc., which any of the incumbents could have added easily.

But the question is, outside of a few gaming web sites, was Flash necessary? Did people need to have Flash menus on their web sites? Not really.
post #10 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

Still way to expensive. The rental plan seems like a good idea, but even with that I'm not sure I'll switch from what I'm using now (GIMP, Acorn, Pixelmator) due to the subscription still being a lot more expensive.

If you can get buy with those apps, then I say go for it. But if you need more advanced features, CMYK support, etc. Photoshop is your best bet.

That said, I can't stand GIMP - it's free and it shows - the UI is awful and does not lend itself to productivity. I couldn't work in GIMP more than a few minutes.
post #11 of 34
Why doesn't Apple buy Adobe already? They could spin off the Pro apps company and have them focus on writing iPad versions of Photoshop, Illustrator, FCP etc.

Has there really been a useful feature they've added to Photoshop since CS1?
post #12 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by heroinsmoker View Post

Why doesn't Apple buy Adobe already? They could spin off the Pro apps company and have them focus on writing iPad versions of Photoshop, Illustrator, FCP etc.

Has there really been a useful feature they've added to Photoshop since CS1?

Spin off? Just take the After Effects team and make them slaves to the Motion team. Premier Pro? Slaves to Final Cut Pro. Same with Lightroom and Aperture.

Photoshop? Keep the name exactly as it is. Stick it to the memory of Adobe. Same with Illustrator.

Flash gets its own ten minute funeral at a Stevenote, just like Mac OS 9. Wake and celebration to follow.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #13 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

I get that Flash has brought capabilities to the web that we'd have not gotten elsewhere, except for video. Flash was late to the video game and only brought some security, forced ad watching, etc., which any of the incumbents could have added easily.

Flash will remain on the web until someone comes up with a way to implement DRM in videos that use the HTML5 <video> tag.

Quote:
But the question is, outside of a few gaming web sites, was Flash necessary? Did people need to have Flash menus on their web sites? Not really.

Today many developers make menus using one or more of HTML, CSS or JavaScript. Modern browsers do a relatively good job of rendering this consistently and to the specifications set out by organisations like W3C.

However, Flash still remains as one of the only ways for web developers to ensure that their content is 100% consistent across devices. Even modern browsers struggle with some elements and just a few years ago there was massive disparity between what a developer would see in their browser and what a user would see in theirs.

And that's not even considering that most users are not using the latest versions of their browsers...
post #14 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

>>>>>>>>Even modern browsers struggle with some elements and just a few years ago there was massive disparity between what a developer would see in their browser and what a user would see in theirs.

You were talking about Flash, right?

Many people have seen "spinning Beach balls", turbine-screaming fans, security holes, browser and system-crashing, all due to "a designer's dream".

Well I'm a designer... and MY dream is to get information as safe and sound to my client's potential customers. That is all. A word-wrap here or a sliding menu there... the content is what is important, not the Disney-fication of the presentation.

IMHO.
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 #15 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

Still way to expensive. The rental plan seems like a good idea, but even with that I'm not sure I'll switch from what I'm using now (GIMP, Acorn, Pixelmator) due to the subscription still being a lot more expensive.

"Way too expensive"? If you make money using their products, you should be able to pay them off after one or two projects. If you just use their software to screw around, any price is too expensive.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #16 of 34
The new iMac pages at Apple have some nice animations using Javascript, not Flash obviously. Probably a couple thousand lines of code and three or four frameworks, but what the hell they are almost up to comparable capabilities of Future Splash version 1. Not that it isn't nice...just saying.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #17 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

The new iMac pages at Apple have some nice animations using Javascript, not Flash obviously. Probably a couple thousand lines of code and three or four frameworks, but what the hell they are almost up to comparable capabilities of Future Splash version 1. Not that it isn't nice...just saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple's iMac Page

Code:

-webkit-transition-property: initial;
-webkit-transition-delay: initial;
-webkit-transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.25, 0, 0.25, 1);
-webkit-transition-duration: 1000ms;
-webkit-transform: translate3d(0px, 0px, 0px);


Ooh, look! A thousand lines of code!

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #18 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Ooh, look! A thousand lines of code!

Very nice

Would any Flash experts care to show the code to do the very same thing in Flash?

I wont hold my breath... but I don't have all day either.
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 #19 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Very nice

Would any Flash experts care to show the code to do the very same thing in Flash?

I wont hold my breath... but I don't have all day either.

Granted, that's just the move-in for the first iMac on the first image in the slider, but everything else is the exact same. Heck, the whole thing isn't even in JavaScript; Apple handles the motion between slides with CSS3, as well.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #20 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Very nice

Would any Flash experts care to show the code to do the very same thing in Flash?

I wont hold my breath... but I don't have all day either.

The "-webkit-" prefixes on all of these attributes indicate that they will only be displayed by WebKit browsers (mainly Chrome and Safari).

That means that a maximum of 19.09% of users will see them (far less when you consider that not all users will be running versions of these browsers capable of displaying these animations).

Had Apple implemented the same features in Flash then around 98% or 99% would see them.

We'll be waiting a while until web developers can implement things like Apple has without spending time and money providing hacks and alternative versions for different browsers.
post #21 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

Had Apple implemented the same features in Flash then around 98% or 99% would see them.

I didn't bother to look at the code but I wouldn't be surprised if they have browser detection and lots of conditional code for other browsers. If they don't then they are totally dropping the ball because isn't the iMac about getting people to switch from Windows? Really there should be tons of Javascript in there somewhere.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #22 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Very nice

Would any Flash experts care to show the code to do the very same thing in Flash?

I wont hold my breath... but I don't have all day either.

No code required at all. Just drag and drop in Flash.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #23 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

The "-webkit-" prefixes on all of these attributes indicate that they will only be displayed by WebKit browsers (mainly Chrome and Safari).

That means that a maximum of 19.09% of users will see them (far less when you consider that not all users will be running versions of these browsers capable of displaying these animations).

Had Apple implemented the same features in Flash then around 98% or 99% would see them.

We'll be waiting a while until web developers can implement things like Apple has without spending time and money providing hacks and alternative versions for different browsers.

Well, the pages work in ie, firefox, chrome, safari, camino and opera... So your point is..?
post #24 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

Had Apple implemented the same features in Flash then around 98% or 99% would see them.

Guess I'm in that 1-2%, because with Click2Flash, I don't see any of that crap ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

No code required at all. Just drag and drop in Flash.

Having been forced to use Flash on and off over the past two years, that's complete and utter nonsense.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #25 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Well, the pages work in ie, firefox, chrome, safari, camino and opera... So your point is..?

Yep. It also works in IE7 and almost works in Mozilla 1 on Fedora Core. Funny how they do that using only CSS3 and -webkit prefixes. So, as I said, tons of Javascript and probably more than a couple Ph.D.s in computer science. Sounds like totally accessible technologies to the average web designer who is used to dragging and dropping in Flash where that same thing could be built in a 30 minutes or less. But that is the state of HTML5/CSS3/JS these days. Very complicated. It is nice that they could make it so cross platform compatible, but very complicated.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #26 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Guess I'm in that 1-2%, because with Click2Flash, I don't see any of that crap ever.



Having been forced to use Flash on and off over the past two years, that's complete and utter nonsense.

Do you want a more detailed explanation or is that just hyperbole?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #27 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Do you want a more detailed explanation or is that just hyperbole?

It's not "drag and drop". You paint it as though it's actually easy to use.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #28 of 34
Programming for multi-browser compatibility in Javascript/HTML5/CSS for anything much beyond a simple web page is just pathetic. It is a nightmare without equal in the programming world. Anyone who thinks otherwise should learn more about programming generally.

The W3C standards are design by committee of the worst sort and browser makers have consistently showed no interest in listening to them very carefully. The result has historically been a terrible, terrible mess and it is not changing very fast.

On the other hand, the fact that Flash has been developed by a single company has allowed it to offer genuine cross-browser deployment.

You can hate Flash all you want, but you're able to hate it equally across all browsers.

In terms of ease of programming - you should not confuse the deployment with the programming tool.

What most people think of as 'Flash' is a compiled executable that can be created in many different ways. The 'Flash' application that's part of the Creative Suite is just one way ... but you can also code 'Flash' in TextPad if you want and compile it using the free Flex SDK.

Graphic artists have on the whole used the Adobe Suite Flash tool because it has historically provided a pretty simple graphical interface for animations such as the one on the Apple site - no or very little 'coding' required. However, for coding complex 'Rich Internet Apps' nobody in their right mind would use that tool - you'd use a proper dev environment like Eclipse and the (free) Flex SDK.
post #29 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

It's not "drag and drop". You paint it as though it's actually easy to use.

Simple animations are a snap in Flash.


1. Import a png file perhaps with transparent background
2. Drag onto the stage just off the canvas.
3. Click 30 frames down the timeline and press F6
4. Drag the picture to where you want to end up
5. Right click anywhere in the timeline and select Motion Tween

No step 6.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #30 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

Do you guys honestly believe this nonsense?

Flash and Flash Player are responsible for a huge amount of the interactivity and multimedia content that has been on the web in the past 10+ years. Without it, we'd have a far less rich internet and massive fragmentation of plugins and media players.

I doubt anyone at Adobe or Macromedia set out for "world domination" - they produced a truly excellent product that became popular because of how good it was.

If you'd like to suggest an alternative technology that can deliver what the combination of Flash and Flash Player do, please enlighten us all.

What total crap! Get your head out of your posterior! If there wan't flash, something else would have been invented, and maybe HTML 5 would have come along a lot sooner. To say that they produced a "truly excellent product" is just BS. Buggy, bloated, taking forever to download, often broken, etc. etc. etc. On top of all this, it is grossly overused and clogging the bandwidth of the internet.
post #31 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

The "-webkit-" prefixes on all of these attributes indicate that they will only be displayed by WebKit browsers (mainly Chrome and Safari).

That means that a maximum of 19.09% of users will see them (far less when you consider that not all users will be running versions of these browsers capable of displaying these animations).

Had Apple implemented the same features in Flash then around 98% or 99% would see them.

We'll be waiting a while until web developers can implement things like Apple has without spending time and money providing hacks and alternative versions for different browsers.

You just don't get it! The far easier and better solution is for the browsers to implement webkit. NOT the POS flash! That is the whole point - open versus proprietary adobe crapware...
post #32 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

In the old days of the browser wars, I think that was true. These days, it's not that difficult to write cross-browser code on modern browsers, IMHO. Even things like animated properties aren't that hard to do.

I think the problem is that while it's certainly easier to do the things we been trying to do for 10 years or so, like simple animation, those are things that have been easy to do in Flash for those 10 years. The newer stuff is as buggy and inconsistent as ever.

As a not-terribly cutting-edge example - I've been trying to program an online eReader-type thing using some of the HTML5 'column' capabilities. It's just completely frustrating - and this is stuff that was actually specified by W3C 5 years ago. It's not even consistent in Safari from one update to another - a number of the useful 'column' properties are still classified as 'subject to change' by Apple. This is an app that would be very easy to create in Flash.

Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

In general I agree that up till now, Flash was clearly superior to the HTML/JavaScript combo. But with HTML 5 on the scene and professional tools available that support it, I'm not sure what the future of Flash is.

I'm sure certain uses will move over to HTML5 away from Flash. However, HTML5 really only covers the most obvious things that Flash does: simple animation, simple-ish video playback etc. But Flash has advanced on from those sorts of things. The new stuff people are creating online - the things that will be the obvious things in 10 years time - are still either ridiculously hard in HTML 5 or not remotely possible. As well as the eReader, I'm also working on some media-heavy interactive features - these sort of things are going to become more and more common as our media consumption becomes less linear and they are not remotely possible in HTML5.

I'm not necessarily convinced that Flash is the future for this sort of thing (I'm also using the excellent Unity quite a lot these days) - but I'm fairly sure it will not be a technology controlled by a weak standards committee and then butchered by a bunch of politically motivated browser makers.
post #33 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Just be aware that it isn't anything close to the full photoshop app. These are tool bar apps that only work with photoshop, not on their own.

I am well aware, but the way they support the iPad is pretty cool, don't you think.
post #34 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by heroinsmoker View Post

Has there really been a useful feature they've added to Photoshop since CS1?

Yes there have been a few dozen useful features. About 38 features to be exact.

However, remember that "useful" is a relative term. So I have no idea if the same features I find useful are useful to you.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe releases Creative Suite 5.5 with iPad support for Photoshop