or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe releases free public beta of Photoshop CS6
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe releases free public beta of Photoshop CS6

post #1 of 52
Thread Starter 
Adobe late on Wednesday released a public beta of its first major update to Photoshop in two years, touting new 3D editing capabilities and a redesigned interface.

The preview of Photoshop CS6 is available for download at the Adobe Labs website. The OS X version of the software is a free 984MB download.

Adobe last overhauled Photoshop with the release of Creative Suite 5 in April 2010.

According to the company, highlights of the upcoming version of the photo editing application include a new content-aware patch, "blazingly fast performance," a dark background user interface and "new and re-engineered design tools." The software will be powered by a new Adobe Mercury Graphics Engine, which promises "near-instant results" from editing tools.

“Photoshop CS6 will be a milestone release that pushes the boundaries of imaging innovation with incredible speed and performance,” Winston Hendrickson, Adobe's vice president products, Creative Media Solutions, said in a statement.


Screenshot of an earlier beta of Photoshop CS 6


Users should note that the beta includes features from Adobe Photoshop CS6 Extended, such as 3D editing features and "quantitative imaging analysis capabilities," that will not be included in the basic version of Photoshop CS6.

After downloading the preview, users are directed to select "Try. I want to try Adobe Photoshop CS6 for a limited time." Users will then have seven days to activate the beta with an Adobe ID login.

Adobe has yet to announce an official release date for the software, though the press release announcing the public beta says the final release is "expected" in the first half of this year. Some reports have pointed to a May launch for Creative Suite 6.

AppleInsider was first to leak Photoshop CS6's new features, including the Aperture-like dark background UI and the new 3D capabilities, last October.

[ View article on AppleInsider ]
post #2 of 52
Does anyone else think these yearly "upgrades" are non sense as well?
post #3 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feynman View Post

Does anyone else think these yearly "upgrades" are non sense as well?

Ditto, I would much rather spend the $2600 on a new Mac yearly thanks.

Suppose the upgrade for CSx is like $600 bucks.... well that is still a new Mac on a good ebay day.
post #4 of 52
All I want is to see Photoshop working properly with spaces and full screen. It always overlays itself over other applications and then you can't move it into another space until opening a file. It's really the only app that I would use regularly in full screen mode and sure enough it doesn't do full screen correctly.
post #5 of 52
If you are interested in learning more about the new features, you can watch Deke McClelland demo all of them for free at lynda.com (you don't need to be a member) here.

Personally, I love the fact that character and paragraph styles are finally in Photoshop. It will make mocking up websites much easier.
post #6 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesfritz View Post

If you are interested in learning more about the new features, you can watch Deke McClelland demo all of them for free at lynda.com (you don't need to be a member) here.

Personally, I love the fact that character and paragraph styles are finally in Photoshop. It will make mocking up websites much easier.

Wow that's awesome. I've been hoping for character and paragraph styles for years - never thought it would actually happen. That will save tons of time.
post #7 of 52
Although I hate Adobe with it's DRM, weird interface conventions and bloated apps, Photoshop is still king of the hill in its class.
post #8 of 52
"The software Adobe Photoshop CS6 requires Runtime Java" Big fail. The only reason I will be upgrading is, if I don't I loose my upgrade eligibility for future versions (CS3 user here).
Quote:
Get busy living or get busy dying--Stephen King
Reply
Quote:
Get busy living or get busy dying--Stephen King
Reply
post #9 of 52
Redesigned user interface = "We changed the color and shape of buttons a little". I bet we will see the same sloppy Flash UI crap we've had since CS3 or 4.
post #10 of 52
As always it will be really nice if they fixed the probs in precious releases as a free update...

My biggest issues with cs 5:

Dual monitor editing gets really messed up. I have to collect the windows in tabs to get it working properly again... Main symptom is having one document selected but the layers palette is showing another document's layers and well nothing works till I fix it.

Performance is ridiculous... They should tap into apple's Apis more eff the pc version. Pixelmator runs rings round pshops in certain functions.

The drawing tools are crap. Want to draw a line or box? It draws a mask! In fact one of cs6s touted features is to allow a dotted line... Wow just wow!
post #11 of 52
I ask this as a non-programmer: is this the 1st version of Photoshop that utilizes multiple cores efficiently and is written in cocoa?
post #12 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by frogbat View Post

As always it will be really nice if they fixed the probs in previous releases as a free update...

Lost any faith in their integrity years ago. Fastest best Pshop I ever had was Pshop 6 on 400mhz OS9 mac with a twelfth of the ram I've got now. Dug it out few years after its retirement when the machine I had at the time lost its HD and was floored at how much more responsive it was than CS2.

Then when I got an Intel Mac the CS3 beta was better and more stable than actual release CS3.

etc etc, I won't count the ways. On CS5 now with Snow Leopard. Each new release is special and individual with the variety of little things that won't work this time.

James Bond would have a favourite vintage of Photoshop that he would ask for like a conoisseur of Adobe's bullshit - 'Yesh, I'll have the Photoshop Shixsh on an O Esh 9 mac pleashe'.

'None of your Shee Esh rubbish like the lasht time. And be quick about it'

It's an adventure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feynman View Post

Does anyone else think these yearly "upgrades" are non sense as well?

You betcha. They feel like they're just re-arranging the chairs and calling it new so they can juice their actual paying customers one more time for more 'shareholder value'.

Adobe give me a feeling like my arm is being twisted and I don't like that.
post #13 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Write View Post

"The software Adobe Photoshop CS6 requires Runtime Java" Big fail. The only reason I will be upgrading is, if I don't I loose my upgrade eligibility for future versions (CS3 user here).

Why would you lose eligibility? You can still install and maintain runtime java, just apple have handed management of this to the developers, it's not managed by apple as part of OS updates, he same as many technologies and database set ups that developers use.
post #14 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by dacloo View Post

Although I hate Adobe with it's DRM, weird interface conventions and bloated apps, Photoshop is still king of the hill in its class.

Do you also hate Apple because of their DRM?
post #15 of 52
I hope the full version is on the Mac App Store. Mountain Lion includes an optional setting to only run apps from the Mac App Store, and I intend to turn it on to protect myself from malware.
post #16 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Do you also hate Apple because of their DRM?

What DRM would that be? Apple were the ones who pushed music companies to drop DRM. Movie and TV studios are the current holdouts in this area. Apple has never been a DRM proponent. As far as I'm aware, none of their applications have DRM, though I might be mistaken.
post #17 of 52
I do believe CS6 is a better update (not an upgrade) compared to CS3, 4, 5 and 5.5… espécially 5.5. And some of the new features and (finally!) the UI-cleanup are very welcomed. But I do agree with most posts above; it's still a bloated, sometimes sluggish, but most of all "jack of all trades" mess compared to Photoshop 5.5 and 6.

Not to mention the Runtime Java and the inability to do proper fullscreen when running on 2 monitors. Oh, and the constant annoying "pop to the front" whenever it's doing something that's ment to be "background actions". Whenever I have an action running in Photoshop and it's working on a bunch of images that will take about 20 minutes éven with an action, it keeps trying to jump to the front… I want to work in another program, not be bugged by you every time you open a new photo. There's just no proper multitasking when you're touching Adobe's programs.
post #18 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx View Post

What DRM would that be? Apple were the ones who pushed music companies to drop DRM. Movie and TV studios are the current holdouts in this area. Apple has never been a DRM proponent. As far as I'm aware, none of their applications have DRM, though I might be mistaken.

I think he's talking about software that can't be easily installed from a "friend's" copy.
post #19 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Why would you lose eligibility?

It's more expensive to upgrade from versions older than one or two generations. Arm twisting.
post #20 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

I hope the full version is on the Mac App Store. Mountain Lion includes an optional setting to only run apps from the Mac App Store, and I intend to turn it on to protect myself from malware.

Adobe is simply not going to cede 30% of it's profits to Apple when they already have their own dedicated sales (and distribution) channels that they need to have to sell their Windows Apps. And thats assuming it's even possible to sell their apps in the MAS (which I doubt is possible given Apple's rules). There is also volume purchasing for business to consider. Simply put, the MAS is incompatible with Adobe's business models.

Second - Last I heard the default is not MAS only, rather the default is signed apps.
post #21 of 52
Adobe... Adobe... Sounds familiar.

Oh, right. They make the suite of programs that I use every single day, that are buggy, expensive, bloated, confusing, and did I mention expensive?

I'm not one of those people who complains when an iPhone app is two bucks instead of one or free, but after paying over and over and over to their well-organized extortion pyramid for decades, I look forward to their downfall.

There's a lot of up and comers out there, many in the app store, that might just do the job.
post #22 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Adobe late on Wednesday released a public beta of its first major update to Photoshop in two years, touting new 3D editing capabilities ...

What a load of crap. Why does an image editor need "3D editing capabilities"?

Adobe already makes about fifty completely similar products, why not just make some crap 3D/image editor monstrosity for those few game designers that might need it and call it something else? Why junk up Photoshop with this stuff when 99% of the users won't need or want it?
post #23 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Adobe... Adobe... Sounds familiar.

Oh, right. They make the suite of programs that I use every single day, that are buggy, expensive, bloated, confusing, and did I mention expensive?

I'm not one of those people who complains when an iPhone app is two bucks instead of one or free, but after paying over and over and over to their well-organized extortion pyramid for decades, I look forward to their downfall.

There's a lot of up and comers out there, many in the app store, that might just do the job.

I'm with you all the way, but last I checked the only capable pixel editors in the app store were really Elements competition, no PS. Nearly all, even the good ones, don't even deal with 16 bit images (if you open a 16 bit TIFF it immediately gets slammed down to 8 bits, and who knows if it's even doing that in the least harmfull manner).

I might have missed something, but I never see that anything has popped up on the radar at DPR or places like that. I would surely look into one if it did, but I've done enough checking out of hopeful alternatives even for just 75% of the load and I've never found one, even that I would replace Elements with.
post #24 of 52
Yay! More pointless and unnecessary changes simply to keep Adobe's new yearly cycle of mandatory (for many) upgrades. Way to milk that user base Adobe! May there one day be real competition.
post #25 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by frogbat View Post


Performance is ridiculous... They should tap into apple's Apis more eff the pc version. Pixelmator runs rings round pshops in certain functions.

Someone else will know the reality (I'm not a programmer, I just play one on the net (as Robert Young used to say in commercials), but I'm not sure if that would mean writing whole hog for Core Image and then only making parts available. From what I can see in Pixelmator, etc, the apps that are written using the Apple hooks use them as much as they can. IIRC from (either the Acorn or Pixelmator can't remember) user forum, some of the things that simply couldn't be upgraded without total rewrites in the program had to do with its reliance on the Apple hooks.

Plus, if they did, it would make it a totally different app than the Windows version, which can't use them.

One of the downsides to a program using Apple hooks for a thing like graphics or audio is that it's a bit like Apple giving a bunch of chefs the exact same ingredients. Though not impossible, it's harder to differentiate your program from the other guy's except with things that really aren't the critical ones. That's why, to my jaded and lazy mind at least, when I see an app like Image Tricks appear in the App Store I don't even want to bother with the trial when I read that it's written for Core Image. Not at all that any Core Image app couldn't be great (as Apple's programs all are), but when used by companies other than Apple it's generally for quality filters with programming convenience at the expense of the other side of the coin. Pixelmator gets great performance, but to me that's its highest attribute and there are so many other factors for an app to gain a place on a Mac. (Haven't used it in a year, maybe something has changed there, but...)

Much as I detest Adobe I don't think this would be a good idea for PS as a way to cut its bloat.
post #26 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Write View Post

"The software Adobe Photoshop CS6 requires Runtime Java" Big fail. The only reason I will be upgrading is, if I don't I loose my upgrade eligibility for future versions (CS3 user here).



Die in a fire. I refuse to have that extra trash on my computer when it isn't actually necessary for the software to run. Guess I'll be tinkering with my installs to get around this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frogbat View Post

Performance is ridiculous... They should tap into apple's Apis more eff the pc version.

Are you kidding? that would require Adobe to actually WRITE Mac software, and you know they'll never do that.

Heaven forbid Adobe actually take the time to write software designed for the OS that is the reason the company exists at all.

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 #27 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

What a load of crap. Why does an image editor need "3D editing capabilities"?

Adobe already makes about fifty completely similar products, why not just make some crap 3D/image editor monstrosity for those few game designers that might need it and call it something else? Why junk up Photoshop with this stuff when 99% of the users won't need or want it?

CS Design Standard has the regular Photoshop without the 3D.

People who don't work professionally in the design business do not need CS of any flavor. You can use Pages, Pixilmator, Opacity, etc. All available on the Mac App Store. Personally I think Adobe make absolutely the best professional design software on the planet and I have always made a lot of money using their applications. I couldn't live without them. Use it everyday all day long.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #28 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

I'm with you all the way, but last I checked the only capable pixel editors in the app store were really Elements competition, no PS. Nearly all, even the good ones, don't even deal with 16 bit images (if you open a 16 bit TIFF it immediately gets slammed down to 8 bits, and who knows if it's even doing that in the least harmfull manner).

I might have missed something, but I never see that anything has popped up on the radar at DPR or places like that. I would surely look into one if it did, but I've done enough checking out of hopeful alternatives even for just 75% of the load and I've never found one, even that I would replace Elements with.

Yep. And that's why I did not cite any specific apps. But it's only a matter of time before one of these sub-$100 apps gets up to speed fully for print, web, and mobile.
post #29 of 52
Please update your target. Time to recalibrate. Adobe makes great software. It's a lot more intuitive and useful when anything Apple has come up with lately in that arena.
post #30 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by sf_dude View Post

Please update your target. Time to recalibrate. Adobe makes great software. It's a lot more intuitive and useful when anything Apple has come up with lately in that arena.



Adobe software. Intuitive. Holy crap, that's funny.

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 #31 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post



Adobe software. Intuitive. Holy crap, that's funny.

Apple has some of the LEAST intuitive software out there. I can honestly say I've gone down far more detours using recent Apple software, and finding out how to change some poorly described radio button function, than with Adobe software.
post #32 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx View Post

What DRM would that be? Apple were the ones who pushed music companies to drop DRM. Movie and TV studios are the current holdouts in this area. Apple has never been a DRM proponent. As far as I'm aware, none of their applications have DRM, though I might be mistaken.

Apple implements DRM on software, movies, and audio books. To be consistant you would also hate Apple due them do implementing it.
post #33 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by sf_dude View Post

Please update your target. Time to recalibrate. Adobe makes great software. It's a lot more intuitive and useful when anything Apple has come up with lately in that arena.

It would liked a lot more by professionals if they would stop fiddling with it and updating EVERY YEAR.
post #34 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by diddy View Post

Adobe is simply not going to cede 30% of it's profits to Apple when they already have their own dedicated sales (and distribution) channels that they need to have to sell their Windows Apps. And thats assuming it's even possible to sell their apps in the MAS (which I doubt is possible given Apple's rules). There is also volume purchasing for business to consider. Simply put, the MAS is incompatible with Adobe's business models.

Second - Last I heard the default is not MAS only, rather the default is signed apps.

They don't have to have to cede any profit, they can simply put the price up to cover the difference. And I would argue they are likely to sell more copies, and therefore make *more* profit, if they use the MAS.

And I know MAS-only is not the default, hence why I said it's an "optional" setting which "I intend to turn on."
post #35 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

They don't have to have to cede any profit, they can simply put the price up to cover the difference. And I would argue they are likely to sell more copies, and therefore make *more* profit, if they use the MAS.

They'd be rejected instantaneously and in perpetuity unless they actually rewrite their applications to take advantage of OS X.

And good for Apple for doing that.

Oh, does anyone think that Apple would let Bridge keep existing? Or the Adobe Application Manager and its tagalong tripe?

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 #36 of 52
Here's the list of minor additions & changes. Seems pretty substantive to me. (still reading through it)

http://forums.adobe.com/message/4223572#4223572

Do what you will, but harm none.

Reply

Do what you will, but harm none.

Reply
post #37 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

They don't have to have to cede any profit, they can simply put the price up to cover the difference.

No they can't. You cannot sell the same app for less on another site according to Apple's rules. Also Adobe sells Windows and Mac versions at the same price.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #38 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

No they can't. You cannot sell the same app for less on another site according to Apple's rules.

I don't think you understand Adobe. They'd just jack up the price across the board without a second thought.

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 #39 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by dualie View Post

It would liked a lot more by professionals if they would stop fiddling with it and updating EVERY YEAR.

Substitute "Apple" and read all the defending. Adobe is just doing what Apple does, which is work the profit to the breaking point for people who like or need the product enough to not leave it.

For all the bitching about PS and Adobe (and I do plenty, and this isn't throwing it back at you dualie : ) just a general comment) no one has a gun to their head. Don't upgrade. Switch to something else. Use Aperture by itself. If a user can't do it than Adobe is succeeding at their job. not failing. They're just failing at giving away cheap professional tools. The fact that no one has, in all these years, released a marginally successful PS alternative in the face of all the people who would love to desert Adobe speaks volumes.
post #40 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I don't think you understand Adobe. They'd just jack up the price across the board without a second thought.

Photoshop 1.07 = $1,000 (1990)

Photoshop CS5 = $699 (2012)

30% savings plus a lot more features. What's to complain about?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe releases free public beta of Photoshop CS6