Photoshop X? - Page 3

Besides what's been mentioned...

There's also new layer and brush modes, workgroup features. A brush palette that's kind of cool. You can choose from lists of presets for each tool. You can resize the curves window.

Although tablet pressure works for brush size I can't find anyway to make it work for opacity.

There's lots of little things through out.

[ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: BKuchta ]</p>

Found them!

Under Brush option.

Size - go to brush size
Opacity - Go to other dynamics.

but you will have to enable EACH brush for the pressure and opacity....this is very annoying ....well...that's why it's beta...

Also, now the memory allocation is exactly the same as the Windows version. Have to 'reserve' the percentage of available RAM to PS....thought the memory allocation would adjust dynamically ......

[ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: Leonis ]</p>

Can anyone comment more on the Aqua UI - in terms of adherence to Apple's standard? Someone mention there is no support for Sheets. Are the open and save dialogs (for example) something that Adobe hacked together, or the standard OS X ones?

Are there are parts of the App that use Classic widgets and such? I can't imagine they would be that sloppy to mix them in but who knows.

Unfortunately none of you can comment to Adobe because then yer up shit creek and so is the guy who leaked the build (actually he's probably already off the beta team at this point, given hown many places it can be found). Dumb, dumb dumb.

Picture a carbon port of PS with a few additions, and ugly thick embossed icons and you have PS 7. I'm disappointed if they don't make some more changes before it's released.

All the drop shadows are soooo annoying. The top tool bar casts shadows on the palettes and each palette casts shawdows on the palettes under them You acn't see the title bar or buttons because of these fricking drop shadows. Very annoying.

You want to get an idea of PS 7? Boot into 9 and open up PS while running Kaleidoscope with an Aqua theme.

Nothing spectacular.

So basically, it's like Illustrator (from a visual standpoint)? That's what it looks like based on the screeshots I've seen. I agree the shadows are a little annoying but they're not as big a nuisance as you make them out to be. They certainly don't obscure the palette buttons (or if they do, Adobe will fix it).

I am more curious about the more substantive aspects of Aqua / Quartz under PS 7 though. The Open / Save Dialogs, font renderings, etc. Anyone else have a comment?

[quote]I am more curious about the more substantive aspects of Aqua / Quartz under PS 7 though. The Open / Save Dialogs, font renderings, etc. Anyone else have a comment?<hr></blockquote>
I am surprised at the reports of PS and Quartz rendering [my polite way of saying bullshite], because since Adobe went cross-platform they have always used their own graphics display and font rasterizing technology. See AGMlib, CoolTypeLib and since Illustrator PDF50lib. I believe PS7 still uses AGMlib and CoolTypelib so any mention of Quartz and PS is probably wrong.

Like Illustrator, no sheets, standard save dialogs.

[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by Moogs :
<strong>So basically, it's like Illustrator (from a visual standpoint)? That's what it looks like based on the screeshots I've seen. I agree the shadows are a little annoying but they're not as big a nuisance as you make them out to be. They certainly don't obscure the palette buttons (or if they do, Adobe will fix it).

I am more curious about the more substantive aspects of Aqua / Quartz under PS 7 though. The Open / Save Dialogs, font renderings, etc. Anyone else have a comment?</strong><hr></blockquote>


Well, there are a lot of people that do mind the shadows, if you don't that's cool.

As for the other stuff, it's carbon, so it's not much different from the 9 version. The open and save are the standard under X, font rendering looked the same as in 9, I don't see how it could use X's quartz engine for anti-aliasing as everything looked like it does in 9, and it's carbon so it does run in 9.

As for the Aqua, looks just like Illustator, and as I said earlier, imagine running 9, using a Kaliedoscope Aqua theme and you have photoshop 7.

You can tell I'm not impressed? Did I mention it was slow?

[quote]You want to get an idea of PS 7? Boot into 9 and open up PS while running Kaleidoscope with an Aqua theme.
Nothing spectacular.<hr></blockquote>

KidRed, you are really bullshitting!!! I can't believe what you're saying.
My impressions are completely different: in Photoshop 7 everything is BEAUTIFULLY "aquafied" and beautifully designed; look at the main toolbar (nearly the same as in illustrator): it's a piece of art!

Sorry, but your comparison between "PS under OS9 while running a Kaleidoscope theme" and the real PS 7 for OSX it's the greatest BS I've ever heard!

[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Zeno ]

[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Zeno ]</p>

What i find funny is.. Photoshop uses the extras.rsrc properly.. but Illustrator doesn't

meaning....?

[quote]Originally posted by Moogs :
<strong>meaning....?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Meaning that Adobe could make Photoshop not have any special Aqua resources but Illustrator does. Even though they use the same type of Widgets.

This means that Photoshop wont look weird if your not using Aqua.

[quote]Originally posted by Zeno:
<strong>

KidRed, you are really bullshitting!!! I can't believe what you're saying.
My impressions are completely different: in Photoshop 7 everything is BEAUTIFULLY "aquafied" and beautifully designed; look at the main toolbar (nearly the same as in illustrator): it's a piece of art!

Sorry, but your comparison between "PS under OS9 while running a Kaleidoscope theme" and the real PS 7 for OSX it's the greatest BS I've ever heard!

[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Zeno ]

[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Zeno ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sorry, but I don't see how you have any kind of power to call my opinion BullShit. Your opinion is BullShit. If it's like that, then go your own way and love PS 7 all you want. I have it, I've used it and it ain't all that. The main toobar looks axactly the smae what the hell are you talking about?

WHat the hell is aquaified about it? Do me a favor.

Open up system prefs.

Open up PS 7.

Do they look similar? No? Why? BECAUSE IT'S NOT ****ING AQUAFIED. It looks like 9 with Kaiedoscope. Why? Because I run 9 everyday and use an X theme with Kaliedoscope! Don't starting swinging profanities out and not expect to get any thrown back at ya. Your post is the great peice of shit I've ever read. You wanna get personally over opinions that's your choice.

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>
You can tell I'm not impressed? Did I mention it was slow?</strong><hr></blockquote>


Did anyone ever mention to you it was still a beta?

It's really annoying when people download illegal beta software on their puter then bitch cause it doesn't work right.

[quote]Originally posted by Sinewave:
<strong>


Did anyone ever mention to you it was still a beta?

It's really annoying when people download illegal beta software on their puter then bitch cause it doesn't work right.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Ah, yea, I think I mentioned that it was a beta in my first post

I hate when people read posts and find something to bitch about instead of adding to the discussion.

The discussion is about PS X and not your bitching about about a post.

Also, read again and again and please quote where I said "..doesn't work right.."

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>

Ah, yea, I think I mentioned that it was a beta in my first post <hr></blockquote></strong>
Then why are you complaining about beta software?
[quote]<strong>
I hate when people read posts and find something to bitch about instead of adding to the discussion.<hr></blockquote></strong>

I HAVE added to the discussion. But when you complain about software that is STILL in development and something your NOT supposed to have it makes you look foolish.

<strong> [quote]
The discussion is about PS X and not your bitching about about a post.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes and my post was also about PS X was it not?

<strong> [quote]
Also, read again and again and please quote where I said "..doesn't work right.." </strong><hr></blockquote>

Did you not complain about the GUI not working right. .and how it was slow?

This is what is called verbal masturbation folks.

[quote] I HAVE added to the discussion. But when you complain about software that is STILL in development and something your NOT supposed to have it makes you look foolish. <hr></blockquote>

this is your previous quote-
[quote] It's really annoying when people download illegal beta software on their puter then bitch cause it doesn't work right. <hr></blockquote>

Wow, Thanks for adding that helpful and inteligent piece of PS 7 info!

[quote] Then why are you complaining about beta software?<hr></blockquote>

Because, just maybe, the icons will stay the same, the drop shadows will remain, nothing new will be added this far into developement...um, get the idea?

[quote] Yes and my post was also about PS X was it not? <hr></blockquote>

Um, no, read it again. It was your comment about me bitching about beta software. Nothing contributing to PS 7.

[quote] Did you not complain about the GUI not working right. .and how it was slow?

This is what is called verbal masturbation folks. <hr></blockquote>

This is what's called stupidity folks. How is complaing about speed and the icons being too big & drop shadows that are annoying stating that the software doesn't work? Yep, stupidity at it's stupidest

We can continue the piss war (or flame war on mainstream boards) or we can further discuss PS 7.

If you have some intelligent questions I can provide some detailed answers to my best ability- have you had a go 'round with PS 7 yet? Have any questions?

uh...The thread was interesting until kidred flipped out... sorry man but you could have easily let it die...

It just seems to me that kid didn't add enough disclaimers to his post so sinewave flipped out.

Well, can we stop this and get back into the Photoshop X discussion?

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>
this is your previous quote-
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Yes.. and was I not talking about Photoshop?!? Yes I was.
[quote]<strong>
Because, just maybe, the icons will stay the same, the drop shadows will remain, nothing new will be added this far into developement...um, get the idea?
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Well why don't you wait and see? Yes I am sure the drop shadpws will remain.. as this is a OS X app. All OS X apps do this. This isn't a Photoshop thing.. this is how OS X works. Also if you don't like the drop-shadows in the toolbar group them like this



<strong> [quote]
Um, no, read it again. It was your comment about me bitching about beta software. Nothing contributing to PS 7.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
My comment was about you bitching about a beta version of PS 7. Considering PS7 is beta.. and not for consumer consumption your bitching makes you look ill informed and basically a moron. People who grab illegal software off the net then come on forums and bitch cause it doesn't work the way they want it to more likely than not get told to piss off. Why? Cause it's beta. I was talking about your "and it's too slow" Saying that makes you look foolish when your talking about a beta son. If you knew anything about betaa software you'd know it's usually slower than the final version and you wouldn't have made such a comment. Understand?
[quote]<strong>
This is what's called stupidity folks.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Oh I agree. That is why I posted and pointed it out in the first place. Bitching about beta software being slow is quite stupid
[quote]<strong>
How is complaing about speed and the icons being too big & drop shadows that are annoying stating that the software doesn't work? Yep, stupidity at it's stupidest
<hr></blockquote></strong>
I said you said the "software didn't work right". SLOW = Software not working right.
Stop grabbing for straws.
[quote]<strong>
We can continue the piss war (or flame war on mainstream boards) or we can further discuss PS 7.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Oh I would love to continue discussing PS 7. Under the terms that we know it's a beta.. and that we not make ourselves look like we have our head up our ass by bitching about the over all slowness of beta software.
[quote]<strong>
If you have some intelligent questions I can provide some detailed answers to my best ability- have you had a go 'round with PS 7 yet? Have any questions?<hr></blockquote></strong>
I am *sure* I had used PS 7 before you got your hands on it son. And I am sure with your comments that I have read that you couldn't answer any questions about PS 7 that i don't all ready know.

Remember folks. When you d/l illegal beta software off the net.. it's going to be slow and it will usually have some quirks. Expecting it to be perfect makes you look like a horribly informed brat.

Great. check Illustrator 10, totally different palette behavior. Drop shadows even when they are docked to each other. Annoying.

The PS team kicks #$@$%.

[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>Great. check Illustrator 10, totally different palette behavior. Drop shadows even when they are docked to each other. Annoying.

The PS team kicks #$@$%.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Yeah I noticed that. How lame.
I hope Photoshop doesn't do this in the final version.

[quote]Sorry, but I don't see how you have any kind of power to call my opinion BullShit. Your opinion is BullShit. If it's like that, then go your own way and love PS 7 all you want. I have it, I've used it and it ain't all that. The main toobar looks axactly the smae what the hell are you talking about?

WHat the hell is aquaified about it? Do me a favor.

Open up system prefs.

Open up PS 7.

Do they look similar? No? Why? BECAUSE IT'S NOT ****ING AQUAFIED. It looks like 9 with Kaiedoscope. Why? Because I run 9 everyday and use an X theme with Kaliedoscope! Don't starting swinging profanities out and not expect to get any thrown back at ya. Your post is the great peice of shit I've ever read. You wanna get personally over opinions that's your choice. <hr></blockquote>

I love you.

[quote] Yes.. and was I not talking about Photoshop?!? Yes I was.
<hr></blockquote>

No. I was talking about PS 7 and you were talking about me bitching. That has nothing to do with your experience with PS. Damn, how dense are you?

[quote] Well why don't you wait and see? Yes I am sure the drop shadpws will remain.. as this is a OS X app. All OS X apps do this. This isn't a Photoshop thing.. this is how OS X works. Also if you don't like the drop-shadows in the toolbar group them like this <hr></blockquote>

The shadows will remain which is what I was bitching about. You don't read very well. The shadows I am talking about can be coded around-at least that's what developer extraordinaire Moki has said.

[quote] My comment was about you bitching about a beta version of PS 7. Considering PS7 is beta.. and not for consumer consumption your bitching makes you look ill informed and basically a moron. People who grab illegal software off the net then come on forums and bitch cause it doesn't work the way they want it to more likely than not get told to piss off. Why? Cause it's beta. I was talking about your "and it's too slow" Saying that makes you look foolish when your talking about a beta son. If you knew anything about betaa software you'd know it's usually slower than the final version and you wouldn't have made such a comment. Understand?
<hr></blockquote>

How is saying that PS is slow when it's a beta make me look foolish? Hey, genius, people asked about it and I spoke of my experience. No shit it will be sped up, but since the only version available is beta and it is currently slow, that's what I mentioned. You don't come to logical conclusions very well, do you?

[quote] I said you said the "software didn't work right". SLOW = Software not working right.
Stop grabbing for straws.<hr></blockquote>

Again, how is slow speed a sign that the software doesn't work? That's pure and utter stupidity. That's poor performance but that doesn't mean something is broken. Tweaking the apps speed sin't fixing bugs or glitches. You grabbed the straw and fell on your face.

[quote] Oh I would love to continue discussing PS 7. Under the terms that we know it's a beta.. and that we not make ourselves look like we have our head up our ass by bitching about the over all slowness of beta software.
<hr></blockquote>

I know it's a beta, you know it;s a beta, then what's the problem? Where did you get the idea that the speed was my biggest gripe? It was an obeservation. Take your head out of your ass and maybe you can comprehend posts a little better.

[quote] I am *sure* I had used PS 7 before you got your hands on it son. And I am sure with your comments that I have read that you couldn't answer any questions about PS 7 that i don't all ready know.

Remember folks. When you d/l illegal beta software off the net.. it's going to be slow and it will usually have some quirks. Expecting it to be perfect makes you look like a horribly informed brat. <hr></blockquote>

Thanks for the beta testing of pirated software class 101 there guy

Ridiculing people's opinion just because you want to makes you an imature ass. Rember folks, this is about PS 7, and unless you have some input (which I haven't read any from you yet) then you are the obvious misinformed brat :eek:

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>
No. I was talking about PS 7 and you were talking about me bitching. That has nothing to do with your experience with PS. Damn, how dense are you?
<hr></blockquote></strong>

I was talking about you bitching about a Beta of Photoshop 7. And as far as I can tell the topic said "Photoshop X?" meaning any Photoshop talk. Not that it matters. Your just grabbing for straws son.

[quote]<strong>The shadows will remain which is what I was bitching about. You don't read very well. The shadows I am talking about can be coded around-at least that's what developer extraordinaire Moki has said.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
The Shadows don't remain when you group them. See look at the pic no over lap shadows. As far as I know there isn't any OS X apps out that don't have the 90° drop shadow.
[quote]<strong>
How is saying that PS is slow when it's a beta make me look foolish? Hey, genius, people asked about it and I spoke of my experience. No shit it will be sped up, but since the only version available is beta and it is currently slow, that's what I mentioned. You don't come to logical conclusions very well, do you?
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Next thing you know your going to be telling us the sky is blue. Or the grass is green.
[quote]<strong>
Again, how is slow speed a sign that the software doesn't work? That's pure and utter stupidity.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Ok so it went from "Software not working right" to "Software not working" Big difference there Bub.. nice dodge there.. but it didn't work. Your arguing specifics and analness. Sure sign of the "grabbing of straws"
[quote]<strong>
That's poor performance but that doesn't mean something is broken. Tweaking the apps speed sin't fixing bugs or glitches. You grabbed the straw and fell on your face.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
When something runs slower than it's supposed to it's not working right. Again arguing semantics here. More straw grabbing.
[quote]<strong>
I know it's a beta, you know it;s a beta, then what's the problem? Where did you get the idea that the speed was my biggest gripe? It was an obeservation. Take your head out of your ass and maybe you can comprehend posts a little better.<hr></blockquote></strong>
When you bitch about a application being slow that is a beta you make it sound like you expected it to be better. I think we all know here who has their head up their ass son. I'll give you a hint.. it's not me.
[quote]<strong>

Thanks for the beta testing of pirated software class 101 there guy
<hr></blockquote></strong>
More verbal masturbation folks.
[quote]<strong>
Ridiculing people's opinion just because you want to makes you an imature ass.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
I wasn't ridiculing your opion I was ridiculing the bases behind it. But I don't expect you to understand that
[quote]<strong>
Rember folks, this is about PS 7, and unless you have some input (which I haven't read any from you yet) then you are the obvious misinformed brat
<hr></blockquote></strong>
You might want to go back and look again sugar tits.

[quote] Ok so it went from "Software not working right" to "Software not working" Big difference there Bub.. nice dodge there.. but it didn't work. Your arguing specifics and analness. Sure sign of the "grabbing of straws"
<hr></blockquote>

Hey non-comprehension little smart boy- read this again and tell me how you used your 3 brain cells to formulate your conclusion-
[quote] Picture a carbon port of PS with a few additions, and ugly thick embossed icons and you have PS 7. I'm disappointed if they don't make some more changes before it's released.

All the drop shadows are soooo annoying. The top tool bar casts shadows on the palettes and each palette casts shawdows on the palettes under them You acn't see the title bar or buttons because of these fricking drop shadows. Very annoying.

You want to get an idea of PS 7? Boot into 9 and open up PS while running Kaleidoscope with an Aqua theme.

Nothing spectacular. <hr></blockquote>

[quote] Next thing you know your going to be telling us the sky is blue. Or the grass is green <hr></blockquote>

I'll have to give you some credit for not being totally void of intelligence. Unless you cheated and someone told you those colors.

[quote] The Shadows don't remain when you group them. See look at the pic no over lap shadows. As far as I know there isn't any OS X apps out that don't have the 90° drop shadow.
<hr></blockquote>

Little boy, here, just for you I took 3 pics, yes I out did you. And let me point out just incase your little mind ins' capable of viewing and interpreting the following visual images-the palettes have drop shadows WHEN YOU CLICK ON THEM! I think that would happen, because, they are palettes that have features to be clicked on. Wow, that's why they have drop shadows







[quote] When something runs slower than it's supposed to it's not working right. Again arguing semantics here. More straw grabbing.
<hr></blockquote>

Let's see you interpreted my statement about speed as meaning it doesn't work right. I then explain that I never said it didn't work correctly and you then say that "...it's semantics. More straw grabbing."

Sonny boy, you have an issue, an childhood issue that needs to be looked at. You miss interprent or simply lacked the mental capacity to comprehend a statement and your reasoning is I'm grabbing for straws!? HAHA, boy you need to stay in preschool.

[quote] When you bitch about a application being slow that is a beta you make it sound like you expected it to be better. I think we all know here who has their head up their ass son. I'll give you a hint.. it's not me <hr></blockquote>

Yea, I did expect it to be better. I expected the 3D text wrap like thinksecret said. I expected the shadows to be hardcoded out of the palettes. I expected a few new items worthy of a version 7 title.

You're more stupid then I originally assumed if you believe your head isn't far enough up your ass to not see the world in front of you and understand that you're bored little boy looking to start a flame war on the safe and secure internet when your scared little insecure ass wouldn't dream of being so bold in public.

[quote] More verbal masturbation folks<hr></blockquote>

Yep folks, at least my posts leave you satisfied. His posts need a few bottles of Niagra to get any satisfaction.

[quote] I wasn't ridiculing your opion I was ridiculing the bases behind it. But I don't expect you to understand that
<hr></blockquote>

Bases? Or basis? MMm, ok, well, let's see. I'll try my best and understand your smart intellilectual ways. So my opinion is based on my actual and personal experience with this concrete and tangible piece of software. Ok, I used the software, then I drew some conclusions. I used the software some more and then drew some more conclusions. Then after I had concrete infromation and field time I was able to formulate my opinion. Wow, little man, I gues you did baes your ridicule on my opinion and I guess you're wrong about me not being able to understand you. THAT was you trying to 'grab for straws' right there.

[quote] You might want to go back and look again sugar tits.
<hr></blockquote>

Sugar tits? HAHAHA Is that what all the little boys call you at school? Were you made fun of at school

ROTFLMAO You try, you really do and I'll give you props for that.

[ 12-17-2001: Message edited by: KidRed ]</p>

Anyways, I discovered a few more things new in PS 7 and since I seem to be the only one trying to discuss 7, I'll add more info.

New in 7-
now when you double click on a layer it no longer pops the Blending Options window. Instead you are essentially clicking on just the file name. This allows you to change the file name without having to do so thru Layer Properties as before. I got used to the double click blending option window so this is disappointing and I will have to get used to it.

The Blending Options in the layer palette in more similar to ImageReady now- There's a little 'F' icon at the bottom of the layer palettes as in ImageReady. Clicking on it brings up a contextual menu of the options.

The beta didn't come with a dictionary so I couldn't test the spell checker (this was in 9, may differ in X)

I'll post back if I find anything else new.

Kidred, The reason Adobe has changed the implementation of the blending options is because hundres of users have been begging for it. Most people felt the Layer Styles Dialog (I assume that's what you're referring to) was too big, and coule better be implemented as a dockable palette like ImageReady. So apparently Adobe has listened. This is GOOD news.

Furthermore, I wouldn't assume that just because you're looking at a mid-beta (which you are) that the eventual final appearance of the application will be exactly the same. I can't remember if Illustrator's palette tabs are aquafied or not, but if that's the only thing not aquafied in PS7, you're bitching about nothing. All of the command tools, control widgets and menus are aquafied, so just chill.

Contrary to the arguments going on, I thought the point of this thread was to let the rest of us non-carracho people how the product has changed. I still haven't heard anyone talk about the new features such as real-time warping of objects, etc.

Instead of saying "well there's function X, and I don't like it. Why not just post a small screenshot and let everyone decide for themselves? Sheesh.

Maccentral <a href="http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0112/17.photoshop.php" target="_blank">is reporting</a> that Photoshop won't be available until Q2 2002.

Usually....three months for one quarter.

I am not too sure when the Q1 starts....assuming Q1 starts January.....we should see Photoshop releases on April.

What a long wait!

[quote]Originally posted by Leonis:
<strong>Usually....three months for one quarter.

I am not too sure when the Q1 starts....assuming Q1 starts January.....we should see Photoshop releases on April.

What a long wait! </strong><hr></blockquote>

Since Chizen is talking about their financial year 2002, Q2 is March, April, and May.

I guess Adobe's CEO said Q2 is to make people not expecting too much....

When he said Q1 then everyone will be very excited and in other words they are going to have a lot of pressure.

I still hope late February.....

Well, you guys beat me to it. I take Q2 to mean second quarter of the calendar year. Which means friends *ahem* kidred *ahem* there's lot's of work yet to be done on the application. Aquafication and all. I seriously doubt the feature set is frozen yet. That usually happens about 6 weeks before release IME so they don't introduce new bugs close to production, etc.

Moogs,
I am chill and I'm not bitching. Reacting publicly about my opinion is just that. Anyways, not here to fan the falmes

As I said earlier I haven't found any 3D text warping as claimed at ThinkSecret but something else I found was that when you resize via the bounding box, the image is resized live. And you can resize let go and see how the image looks, then it ok, corfirm the resize. Before you only saw the bounding box and had to assume the size was accurate. I like this.

Not sure about your palette dialog statement. If I understand you, then the dialog window size, look and feel is the same, only they added the ImageReady stylized 'F' to the layer palette so you have that option to bring up the Blending Options window. My comment wqs before you could double click on the active layer to prompt the options window. Now you have to right click and chose blending options or click on the F at the bottom of the palette.

Q2 is usually used in context of the fiscal year, which i think ends in either october or november, so q2 would start in march (though, having lived up here in canada for the past three years, i'm not even sure of that anymore -- everything seems days, weeks or months "off" up here... thanksgiving, tax day, independence day... can you tell i am a transplanted yank?).

anyway, whatever it means, it DOES mean that it won't be shipping in january at macworld san francisco. damn... maybe i can get my jollies with indesign 2 (provided THAT is shipping come jan. 7)

does anyone know if the plug-in architecture has been changed for photoshop x, or am i gonna have to wait for upgrades for them, too?

good thing my wife's still a student -- these upgrades would put me in the poor house otherwise.

[ 12-17-2001: Message edited by: rok ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by rok:
<strong>good thing my wife's still a student -- these upgrades would put me in the poor house otherwise.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually depending on which software....sometimes upgrades cost less than the full academic versions but sometime it's totally opposite

Example

1) Illustrator 10 - Upgrade costs $230 CDN vs $142 CDN for the full academic

2) Cinema 4D 7 - Upgrade costs $300US and $400 US for the full academic

3) Freehand/Flash/Dreamweaver - Upgrade cost at least $225 CDN each vs $145 each (academic)

4) Photoshop - $320CDN for upgrade and $445 CDN for full academic

5) Final Cut Pro - $479 CDN for upgrade and $450 for full academic


Basically.....I always go for the cheapest way cause I am a real cheap bastard

When the academic version is cheaper than buying the upgrade....I then will ask my cousin to grab them for me

But in the case of Photoshop....upgrade cost is over $100 CDN less than the full academic....so in this case I will go for upgrade.

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>
Hey non-comprehension little smart boy- read this again and tell me how you used your 3 brain cells to formulate your conclusion-
<hr></blockquote></strong>

You forgot this one

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>
You can tell I'm not impressed? Did I mention it was slow?
<hr></blockquote></strong>

Nice try son.. but you just got busted trying to dodge your statements. It may work on some loser that has never debated.. but it wont work on me.

[quote]<strong>
Little boy, here, just for you I took 3 pics, yes I out did you. And let me point out just incase your little mind ins' capable of viewing and interpreting the following visual images-the palettes have drop shadows WHEN YOU CLICK ON THEM! I think that would happen, because, they are palettes that have features to be clicked on. Wow, that's why they have drop shadows<hr></blockquote></strong>

And as I pointed out to you about 5 posts before this one.. you can dock the pallettes together as one.. so no drop shadows shows up. Try dragging the window headers to a separate pallette. This has worked in Photoshop for awhile now. I don't know why I have to keep repeating myself. Obviously you don't know of what I am talking about because of your lack of Photoshop knowledge. Cowerd knew what I was talking about. Maybe he can explain it to you a tad better. But thanks for showing everyone in this thread how much real knowledge you have about Photoshop.

[quote]<strong>
Let's see you interpreted my statement about speed as meaning it doesn't work right. I then explain that I never said it didn't work correctly and you then say that "...it's semantics. More straw grabbing."<hr></blockquote></strong>

When you say something it too slow your saying it's not working right. If it was wprking right it would not be slow. You WHERE arguing semantics.
[quote]<strong>
Sonny boy, you have an issue, an childhood issue that needs to be looked at. You miss interprent or simply lacked the mental capacity to comprehend a statement and your reasoning is I'm grabbing for straws!? HAHA, boy you need to stay in preschool.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Ah more verbal masturbation.. all you did was to personally attack me.. and you proved nothing other than you had no point. No proof.. no backup. Your the type of poster that thinks if your reply with enough personal attacks you'll look right. But the people in this world that actually Read--&gt;Comprehend will see how FOS you are son. Your posts keep getting more and more like flames and less credible each time. I can't WAIT to read the next batch of garbage from you.
[quote]<strong>
Yea, I did expect it to be better. I expected the 3D text wrap like thinksecret said.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I bet you get mad every MW that Steve doesn't show the LCD iMac too huh? Damn you Steve! MOSR said you'd release one! Boy am I pissed! Who's fault is this? Your own for believing lame rumor sites.
[quote]<strong>
I expected the shadows to be hardcoded out of the palettes. I expected a few new items worthy of a version 7 title.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You expected the shadows to be hardcoded out of the pallettes? Why? That would not be following along with Aqua's guidelines. Like I showed you and told you again and again... you can group the pallettes together so there is no drop shadows between them.
[quote]<strong>
You're more stupid then I originally assumed if you believe your head isn't far enough up your ass to not see the world in front of you and understand that you're bored little boy looking to start a flame war on the safe and secure internet when your scared little insecure ass wouldn't dream of being so bold in public.<hr></blockquote></strong>
More verbal masturbation .. are you in Jr. High? Yes indeed if you was spouting off this nonsense IRL I would indeed tell you what a moron you was face to face.
[quote]<strong>
Yep folks, at least my posts leave you satisfied. His posts need a few bottles of Niagra to get any satisfaction.<hr></blockquote></strong>
From what I have read.. I am not the only one in this thread that thinks your a moron.. but you can be delusional all you want
[quote]<strong>
Bases? Or basis? MMm, ok, well, let's see. I'll try my best and understand your smart intellilectual ways. So my opinion is based on my actual and personal experience with this concrete and tangible piece of software. Ok, I used the software, then I drew some conclusions. I used the software some more and then drew some more conclusions. Then after I had concrete infromation and field time I was able to formulate my opinion. Wow, little man, I gues you did baes your ridicule on my opinion and I guess you're wrong about me not being able to understand you. THAT was you trying to 'grab for straws' right there.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you re-read your posts before you hit the "add reply" button?
You used the software expecting it to act like a final product. When it didn't .. you made silly comments like "You can tell I'm not impressed? Did I mention it was slow?"
Since when hasn't Photoshop betas been slow?

Complaining about features in a beta is one thing. Complaining about the responsiveness in it is another.

[quote]<strong>
Sugar tits? HAHAHA Is that what all the little boys call you at school? Were you made fun of at school </strong><hr></blockquote>
No that is my little pet name for you.. cause you argue like a woman. With no real reason or for-thought.

[quote] You forgot this one <hr></blockquote>

Um, ok, I gave you too much credit. Obviously you don't have brain cells if you conclude "It doesn't work" from my statements about "not impressed' and "it's slow". Damn, you just get dumber as each post goes by.

[quote] Nice try son.. but you just got busted trying to dodge your statements. It may work on some loser that has never debated.. but it wont work on me. <hr></blockquote>

I'm not dodging any of my statements, you just don't have an arguement and now "you're grabbing for straws".

[quote] And as I pointed out to you about 5 posts before this one.. you can dock the pallettes together as one.. so no drop shadows shows up. Try dragging the window headers to a separate pallette. This has worked in Photoshop for awhile now. I don't know why I have to keep repeating myself. Obviously you don't know of what I am talking about because of your lack of Photoshop knowledge. Cowerd knew what I was talking about. Maybe he can explain it to you a tad better. But thanks for showing everyone in this thread how much real knowledge you have about Photoshop. <hr></blockquote>

My lack of photoshop knowledge? Little child, I will run rings around your silly little ass and make you cry for your mama's breast when it comes to PS. I guess you're too stupid to notice the screencaps above. THEY HAVE DROPSHADOWS ONCE YOU CLICK ON A FREAKING PALETTE YOU MORON. Yes, they dock together and do not produce INDIVIDUAL shadows UNTIL you CLICK ON ONE. Them. like in my magical screen caps, THER SHADOWS MAGICALLY APPEAR. Damn, you get dumber by the sentence.

[quote] When you say something it too slow your saying it's not working right. If it was wprking right it would not be slow. You WHERE arguing semantics. <hr></blockquote>

You're slow but I wouldn't go as far as to say you were broken. VPC works correctly but is dog slow. Office is slow but I wouldn't say broken. ImageReady 3 (current) is slow but I wouldn't say it's broken. How many straws do you have because you've reached for a lot.

[quote] Ah more verbal masturbation.. all you did was to personally attack me.. and you proved nothing other than you had no point. No proof.. no backup. Your the type of poster that thinks if your reply with enough personal attacks you'll look right. But the people in this world that actually Read--&gt;Comprehend will see how FOS you are son. Your posts keep getting more and more like flames and less credible each time. I can't WAIT to read the next batch of garbage from you.
<hr></blockquote>

Your flames never were credible and started out as personal attacks from your first post so look in the mirror and check you self because you are the shit thrower here chump. My grabage will be just as thick as yours except you'll be just grabbing for the bag of straws now.

[quote] I bet you get mad every MW that Steve doesn't show the LCD iMac too huh? Damn you Steve! MOSR said you'd release one! Boy am I pissed! Who's fault is this? Your own for believing lame rumor sites.
<hr></blockquote>

Ooohh Yeess!! You are such a smart little boy. I use PS daily and earn my living on it, but yea, I think an new iMac would work really well with high end graphic apps. Ohh goody goody.

Hey genius, I mentioned the 3D text warp as mentioned in ThinkSecret BECAUSE THAT WAS THE ONLY PUBLIC INFO AVAILABLE so I wanted to inform all the readers that I DID NOT FIND THIS FEATURE. So they are up to par on the current feature set versus what they've read at a rumor site. UNDERSTAND NOW? Damn, pretty soon I;'ll have to have my daughter finish deabting becasue she's more you're level. Wait, she's not old enough to type yet...sorry

[quote] You expected the shadows to be hardcoded out of the pallettes? Why? That would not be following along with Aqua's guidelines. Like I showed you and told you again and again... you can group the pallettes together so there is no drop shadows between them.
<hr></blockquote>

Genius, intil you click on one, read above and re-read it again and again....

[quote] More verbal masturbation .. are you in Jr. High? Yes indeed if you was spouting off this nonsense IRL I would indeed tell you what a moron you was face to face. <hr></blockquote>

Sorry little boy, JR High was a very long time ago. Trying to base my age on my nick ain't gonna work because genius, it's a nickname and most nickname stay with you for years and years.


As for calling me a moron to my face face, I'd knock you square on your puck little ass.

[quote] From what I have read.. I am not the only one in this thread that thinks your a moron.. but you can be delusional all you want
<hr></blockquote>

Well a side fom the one post saying I was bullshitting the only other post said YOU AND I BOTH lost it. So, genius, you're notting reading and comprehending again.

[quote] Do you re-read your posts before you hit the "add reply" button?
You used the software expecting it to act like a final product. When it didn't .. you made silly comments like "You can tell I'm not impressed? Did I mention it was slow?"
Since when hasn't Photoshop betas been slow?

Complaining about features in a beta is one thing. Complaining about the responsiveness in it is another.

<hr></blockquote>

I'm not impressed is a silly comment? Oh do tell, how can that be silly? Adobe could very well release PS 7 as is (barring..) and charge the normal rates so an app that doesn't have many new features and it's as aquafied as I had hoped. So therefore, I'm not impressed. I was very impressed with 6.0, but then again, I don't want to have to walk you through everything so just take my word for it. Feature set is mininal and we all know X isn't itself a speeddemon and PS 7 being carbon X/9 I was expecting it to be a little more speedier. Why? Because I had a beta for 6.5, 6.0, 5.5 and yes, genius, you guessed it, they were faster. I know it will be faster but they have quite away to go to get it anywhere near 9, which is why I was expecting it to be a lot closer.

[quote] No that is my little pet name for you.. cause you argue like a woman. With no real reason or for-thought <hr></blockquote>

No it's for you, no it's for you, you're such a pussy. I argue like a women? Then that makes you a mentally challenged transsexual that only know how to nag, bitch, cry, kick, scream, and you yea, grab for straws.

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>
Um, ok, I gave you too much credit. Obviously you don't have brain cells if you conclude "It doesn't work" from my statements about "not impressed' and "it's slow". Damn, you just get dumber as each post goes by.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Some one is still arguing semantics and trying to use personal attacks to make himself look in the "know" Unimpressive.
<strong> [quote]
I'm not dodging any of my statements, you just don't have an arguement and now "you're grabbing for straws".</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes you did .. you pruposably left off that last sentence. You tried to dodge it.. you got busted for it. Now your making excuses and more personal attacks.
[quote]<strong>
My lack of photoshop knowledge? Little child
<hr></blockquote></strong>
When calling one a "little child" it shows your insecurity. But go ahead
[quote]<strong>
I will run rings around your silly little ass and make you cry for your mama's breast when it comes to PS.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Yup I'd say Jr. High
[quote]<strong>
I guess you're too stupid to notice the screencaps above. THEY HAVE DROPSHADOWS ONCE YOU CLICK ON A FREAKING PALETTE YOU MORON.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Heh no they don't. Not in the version *I* am using 7.0X043 Beta. When you have the palletes dock clicking on them or the tabs DO NOT produce a drop shadow around each pallete.
[quote]<strong>
Yes, they dock together and do not produce INDIVIDUAL shadows UNTIL you CLICK ON ONE. Them. like in my magical screen caps, THER SHADOWS MAGICALLY APPEAR.
<hr></blockquote></strong>

Heh and again.. no they don't. Want me to take a SnapzPro movie of this so you can see?
[quote]<strong>
Damn, you get dumber by the sentence.
<hr></blockquote></strong>

Pot.. kettle..
[quote]<strong>
Your flames never were credible and started out as personal attacks from your first post so look in the mirror and check you self because you are the shit thrower here chump. My grabage will be just as thick as yours except you'll be just grabbing for the bag of straws now.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Heh more verbal masturbation and lack of content folks.
[quote]<strong>
Ooohh Yeess!! You are such a smart little boy. I use PS daily and earn my living on it, but yea, I think an new iMac would work really well with high end graphic apps. Ohh goody goody.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
How did you get that from anything I said? it's puzzling how you came up with that bizarro extreme.
[quote]<strong>
Hey genius, I mentioned the 3D text warp as mentioned in ThinkSecret BECAUSE THAT WAS THE ONLY PUBLIC INFO AVAILABLE so I wanted to inform all the readers that I DID NOT FIND THIS FEATURE. So they are up to par on the current feature set versus what they've read at a rumor site
<hr></blockquote></strong>
You complained it wasn't there cause ThinkSecret said it would be. Is this Adobe
s fault? No. It's yours for believing everything you read.
[quote]<strong>
UNDERSTAND NOW? Damn, pretty soon I;'ll have to have my daughter finish deabting becasue she's more you're level. Wait, she's not old enough to type yet...sorry<hr></blockquote></strong>
More personal attack verbal masturbation.
[quote]<strong>
Genius, intil you click on one, read above and re-read it again and again....
</strong><hr></blockquote>
And again.. your wrong here in a sec I am going to even make a movie JUST FOR YOU!
[quote]<strong>
Sorry little boy, JR High was a very long time ago. Trying to base my age on my nick ain't gonna work because genius, it's a nickname and most nickname stay with you for years and years.<hr></blockquote></strong>
Actually I was basing your age on the way you post. And the personal attacks. You sound like your in Jr.High. Your older than that? I guess some people never grow out of it.
[quote]<strong>
As for calling me a moron to my face face, I'd knock you square on your puck little ass.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
You must knock a lot of people on their ass huh?
Yes I am sure you'd do that
[quote]<strong>
Well a side fom the one post saying I was bullshitting the only other post said YOU AND I BOTH lost it. So, genius, you're notting reading and comprehending again.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
So lets see TWO other people than me in this thread think your a idiot.. that is 3 people. VS my 0. Who's the idiot?
[quote]<strong>
I'm not impressed is a silly comment? Oh do tell, how can that be silly? Adobe could very well release PS 7 as is (barring..) and charge the normal rates so an app that doesn't have many new features and it's as aquafied as I had hoped. So therefore, I'm not impressed. I was very impressed with 6.0, but then again, I don't want to have to walk you through everything so just take my word for it. Feature set is mininal and we all know X isn't itself a speeddemon and PS 7 being carbon X/9 I was expecting it to be a little more speedier. Why? Because I had a beta for 6.5, 6.0, 5.5 and yes, genius, you guessed it, they were faster. I know it will be faster but they have quite away to go to get it anywhere near 9, which is why I was expecting it to be a lot closer.<hr></blockquote></strong>
Ok we know this.. but your STILL COMPARING A BETA TO A FINAL VERSION!!? Expecting a beta to be as fast as the final is silly and basically ignorant. And NONE of the Photoshop BETAS have ever been as fast as the final. 6.5, 6.0, 5.5? Wow you have been using Photoshop long.

[quote]<strong>
No it's for you, no it's for you,
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Good comeback! I'm rubber your glue..
[quote]<strong>
you're such a pussy.
<hr></blockquote></strong>

[quote]<strong>
I argue like a women? Then that makes you a mentally challenged transsexual that only know how to nag, bitch, cry, kick, scream, and you yea, grab for straws.<hr></blockquote></strong>


Oh yeah .. here is my proof to back up my argument.

<a href="http://sinewave.wirefire.com/forums/Photoshopscreensnapz001.mov" target="_blank">http://sinewave.wirefire.com/forums/Photoshopscreensnapz001.mov</a>

Look.. tabbed pallettes in Photoshop X. And LOOK when I choose a pallete.. no drop shadows!

How about that.

[ 12-18-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>

Thread-lockin' time!

Thank for ruining a perfectly good thread, boys!

<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:
<strong>Thread-lockin' time!

Thank for ruining a perfectly good thread, boys!

<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

I can't help it if Red can't admit to being wrong. If he still claims that docked pallets show drop shadows after I proved the didn't in the video.. than I will drop it. It will be well known that he is a idiot and no one will believe a thing he has to say.

I tired to call a truce but genius boy got a ruffle in his panties and won't stop kicking. So, I have to present my rebuttal. But I do and have agreed that this thread has gotten out of hand.

(sinebaby, I didn't forget about ya ) But before I jump back into the pit with you I do have a question. I was able to get 2 palettes to link as you described but not sure how I did it. Can you explain how to do that to the palettes where the seemed to be joined? I use 3 palettes and only got the top 2 to join. I was humbly unaware of that feature and am plesantly surprised.