Adobe software is utter crap, someone please step up and show these losers how to innovate and cooperate.
Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver and InDesign are industry standards. Furthermore, these apps have made careers for countless developers.....utter crap?.....uh....how about you go back to your KidPix image editor and we'll ask for your opinion next time we need to fill a circle with the paint bucket.
Sounds like you should try the Aperture 3 trial...
See above. I have the Lr 3 beta. I have the Aperture 3 trial. Neither is going to completely take away the need for Ps, not in their current incarnations.
At least with Adobe, I can guess why they won't; my guess is that they simply refuse to add enough functionality to Lr in order to prevent cannibalizing Ps sales.
As for Apple, I have no idea why they won't step up to the plate.
[QUOTE=waltsatan;1573024]Whoever these people are, they aren't very familiar with iPhone compiling. It's very much working and is pretty impressive. There are quite a few apps already in the app store:
I agree......it works great and I'm blown away at how easy it is!!
Why would you need layers and masks in a non-destructive program like Lightroom?
If you know why I need them in Ps, you'd know why I'd like them in Lr.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIM
You know there are variations of Photoshop without the 3D crap.
Is that what the article says about CS5? That's not what I got from it:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
The casual Photoshop user won't recognize too much of a difference in the software over the existing version, these people say. Instead, the enhancements will play to designers who work with relatively large files, manipulate 3D objects, and work with video.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
The bulk of the other changes within Photoshop CS5 are said to focus on 3D features.
Are you saying you have some inside information to the contrary?
I don't need Flash, I need for InDesign to do a much better job of creating ePub books. For the first time since CS1, it looks like I may be taking a pass on this next upgrade.
I wonder with CS5 if Adobe will finally get rid of scratch disks. OS X has really great memory management, and it seems stupid for them to reinvent the wheel trying to use their own virtual memory system. That may have been a good idea back under OS 9 but not now under OS X.
I prefer to buy my music, movies, books, and software. Adobe's Creative Suite is very expensive, but this might be the year I buy it for home (rather than continuing to use a "shared" version. I've been waiting for the 64-bit versions for a while. It's going to be an expensive year, but this is my career and Photoshop will easily make me back the money I spend on it. Hope it runs well.
The reason Photoshop has layers is because it's a destructive program.
And yet I use Ps all the time, non-destructively. Clearly, I should be drawn and quartered or at least tried as a heretic for using a feature in such an unapproved fashion.
There are corrections I can only do in Ps (by essentially pulling apart pieces of an image) that a photography-based program such as Lr should easily be able to deliver on.
Appleinsider, please write articles that are less USA/northern hemisphere centric. 'Spring' for the southern hemisphere is in September, please use months instead for timeframes. Also less on the americanisms, such as 'under the hood' and 'in the fall'. Others in non USA countries, really don't know what you are talking about, what is 'hood' for instance the curtain that covers the clitoris? This is not in this article but 'sometime in the Fall' , what is that, snow fall?
This is a concern "The casual Photoshop user won't recognize too much of a difference in the software over the existing version, these people say."
You mean to say after all this word porting to 'Cocoa' there is no User Interface improvement? Is the GUI ported to Cocoa or not? Is it going to look like a crappy piece of legacy Carbon? How can they possibly and supposedly 're-write' the GUI in Cocoa for it to be unchanged to the end user? I can tell the difference between FireFox and Camino.
You mean to say after all this word porting to 'Cocoa' there is no User Interface improvement? Is the GUI ported to Cocoa or not? Is it going to look like a crappy piece of legacy Carbon? How can they possibly and supposedly 're-write' the GUI in Cocoa for it to be unchanged to the end user? I can tell the difference between FireFox and Camino.
Adobe is somewhat famous for designing their own UI/UX instead of following the Apple HIG. It's easier for them to develop one Adobe UI instead of developing specific Windows and OS X style UIs.
So to answer your question, it's going to look like a crappy piece of legacy Adobe.
Appleinsider, please write articles that are less USA/northern hemisphere centric. 'Spring' for the southern hemisphere is in September, please use months instead for timeframes. Also less on the americanisms, such as 'under the hood' and 'in the fall'. Others in non USA countries, really don't know what you are talking about, what is 'hood' for instance the curtain that covers the clitoris? This is not in this article but 'sometime in the Fall' , what is that, snow fall?
This is a concern "The casual Photoshop user won't recognize too much of a difference in the software over the existing version, these people say."
You mean to say after all this word porting to 'Cocoa' there is no User Interface improvement? Is the GUI ported to Cocoa or not? Is it going to look like a crappy piece of legacy Carbon? How can they possibly and supposedly 're-write' the GUI in Cocoa for it to be unchanged to the end user? I can tell the difference between FireFox and Camino.
This concerns me also.
If they were re-writing the thing in Cocoa, the GUI would be the first thing to change would it not?
It seems to me that what they are doing here is making the underpinnings of the program 64 bit, but not changing the GUI, and not necessarily using an all Cocoa development environment. So despite what they've been saying for years, they actually (probably) *aren't* changing their development environment at Adobe and are still using the cross-platofrm (i.e. - Windows) tools to create the products.
The whole point of why Photoshop sucks is not because it's not 64 bit "under the hood."
- Photoshop sucks because it uses an inconsistent, custom, Windows-style UI written in Flash.
- Photoshop sucks because the installer was written in 1993.
- Photoshop sucks because it uses proprietary memory management.
- Photoshop sucks because it includes a bunch of crap that no one uses or wants (like the "3-D" stuff they are focussing on according to this article.)
They aren't listening to their customers at all. They're changing all the stuff that no one cares about but leaving in all the problems that people have been writing about for years.
I think they must be just batshit insane over at Adobe. There is no other explanation.
Comments
Adobe software is utter crap, someone please step up and show these losers how to innovate and cooperate.
Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver and InDesign are industry standards. Furthermore, these apps have made careers for countless developers.....utter crap?.....uh....how about you go back to your KidPix image editor and we'll ask for your opinion next time we need to fill a circle with the paint bucket.
Sounds like you should try the Aperture 3 trial...
See above. I have the Lr 3 beta. I have the Aperture 3 trial. Neither is going to completely take away the need for Ps, not in their current incarnations.
At least with Adobe, I can guess why they won't; my guess is that they simply refuse to add enough functionality to Lr in order to prevent cannibalizing Ps sales.
As for Apple, I have no idea why they won't step up to the plate.
See above.
As for Apple, I have no idea why they won't step up to the plate.
You do not want to be too isolated on the Apple island.
Ed
I agree......it works great and I'm blown away at how easy it is!!
Why would you need layers and masks in a non-destructive program like Lightroom?
If you know why I need them in Ps, you'd know why I'd like them in Lr.
You know there are variations of Photoshop without the 3D crap.
Is that what the article says about CS5? That's not what I got from it:
The casual Photoshop user won't recognize too much of a difference in the software over the existing version, these people say. Instead, the enhancements will play to designers who work with relatively large files, manipulate 3D objects, and work with video.
The bulk of the other changes within Photoshop CS5 are said to focus on 3D features.
Are you saying you have some inside information to the contrary?
If you know why I need them in Ps, you'd know why I'd like them in Lr.
Is that what the article says about CS5? That's not what I got from it:
Are you saying you have some inside information to the contrary?
The reason Photoshop has layers is because it's a destructive program.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/compare/
And ImageReady, unlike Fireworks, came with Photoshop.
encouraging traditional print publishers to enhance their print designs, such as brochures and magazines, with video and animations using Flash
How the f**k can "traditional print publishers" print a document with "video and animation"? or did I miss the point of this new "feature' ...
The reason Photoshop has layers is because it's a destructive program.
And yet I use Ps all the time, non-destructively.
There are corrections I can only do in Ps (by essentially pulling apart pieces of an image) that a photography-based program such as Lr should easily be able to deliver on.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/compare/
I'm missing your point here; the top features of Ps CS4 from your link include:
"... new nondestructive editing features that put you in control, including the new Adjustments and Masks panels"
This is a concern "The casual Photoshop user won't recognize too much of a difference in the software over the existing version, these people say."
You mean to say after all this word porting to 'Cocoa' there is no User Interface improvement? Is the GUI ported to Cocoa or not? Is it going to look like a crappy piece of legacy Carbon? How can they possibly and supposedly 're-write' the GUI in Cocoa for it to be unchanged to the end user? I can tell the difference between FireFox and Camino.
How the f**k can "traditional print publishers" print a document with "video and animation"? or did I miss the point of this new "feature' ...
Print publishers also have online sites.
You mean to say after all this word porting to 'Cocoa' there is no User Interface improvement? Is the GUI ported to Cocoa or not? Is it going to look like a crappy piece of legacy Carbon? How can they possibly and supposedly 're-write' the GUI in Cocoa for it to be unchanged to the end user? I can tell the difference between FireFox and Camino.
Adobe is somewhat famous for designing their own UI/UX instead of following the Apple HIG. It's easier for them to develop one Adobe UI instead of developing specific Windows and OS X style UIs.
So to answer your question, it's going to look like a crappy piece of legacy Adobe.
Appleinsider, please write articles that are less USA/northern hemisphere centric. 'Spring' for the southern hemisphere is in September, please use months instead for timeframes. Also less on the americanisms, such as 'under the hood' and 'in the fall'. Others in non USA countries, really don't know what you are talking about, what is 'hood' for instance the curtain that covers the clitoris? This is not in this article but 'sometime in the Fall' , what is that, snow fall?
This is a concern "The casual Photoshop user won't recognize too much of a difference in the software over the existing version, these people say."
You mean to say after all this word porting to 'Cocoa' there is no User Interface improvement? Is the GUI ported to Cocoa or not? Is it going to look like a crappy piece of legacy Carbon? How can they possibly and supposedly 're-write' the GUI in Cocoa for it to be unchanged to the end user? I can tell the difference between FireFox and Camino.
This concerns me also.
If they were re-writing the thing in Cocoa, the GUI would be the first thing to change would it not?
It seems to me that what they are doing here is making the underpinnings of the program 64 bit, but not changing the GUI, and not necessarily using an all Cocoa development environment. So despite what they've been saying for years, they actually (probably) *aren't* changing their development environment at Adobe and are still using the cross-platofrm (i.e. - Windows) tools to create the products.
The whole point of why Photoshop sucks is not because it's not 64 bit "under the hood."
- Photoshop sucks because it uses an inconsistent, custom, Windows-style UI written in Flash.
- Photoshop sucks because the installer was written in 1993.
- Photoshop sucks because it uses proprietary memory management.
- Photoshop sucks because it includes a bunch of crap that no one uses or wants (like the "3-D" stuff they are focussing on according to this article.)
They aren't listening to their customers at all. They're changing all the stuff that no one cares about but leaving in all the problems that people have been writing about for years.
I think they must be just batshit insane over at Adobe. There is no other explanation.