Adobe to Unveil Creative Suite 4 on September 23rd

[samwich]

Saw this today, thought it might start some conversation or get people excited.

FTA: That’s right we will be officially announcing the 4th version of the Creative Suite on September 23rd. Now before you get the wrong idea, this is NOT the release date but rather our official unveiling of it. You can register to view a special web broadcast that will take place on the 23rd. I highly recommend you check it out if you want to learn more. Get plenty of sleep now as you will have more new toys than you’ll know what to do with very soon.

(article http://theflashblog.com/?p=431)

Official adobe event http://adobe.istreamplanet.com/

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Adobe is hosting a webcast to publicly unveil Creative Suite 4 (http://theflashblog.com/?p=431), their next-generation graphic design, video editing, and web development application package, on September 23rd. Advance registration (http://adobe.istreamplanet.com/) is requested in order to obtain viewing instructions. No specific details on the content of the webcast have been announced, and the release date, package options, and pricing for Creative Suite 4 remain unknown.

Adobe announced public betas (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/05/27/adobe-dreamweaver-fireworks-and-soundbooth-cs4-public-betas/) of Dreamweaver, Fireworks, and Soundbooth in May, and additional information on the Photoshop CS4 interface (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/06/21/adobe-photoshop-cs4-interface-and-screenshots/) was revealed in June. Early reports of an October release (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/05/24/next-version-of-photoshop-to-be-gpu-accelerated/) for CS4 were contested by Adobe, although this may end up being fairly accurate, as most Creative Suite 3 bundle packages began shipping (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/04/16/adobes-creative-suite-3-design-and-web-shipping/) less than three weeks after its March 2007 unveiling (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/03/27/adobe-creative-suite-3-announced/).

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/09/02/adobe-to-unveil-creative-suite-4-on-september-23rd/)

[FakeWozniak]

Another upgrade from Adobe I won't buy because it does very little more than the last version does.

[stevearm]

I thought they weren't calling it CS4?

[krye]

BS. I'll believe it when I see it. Besides Microsoft, I think Adobe has one of the slowest roll outs when it comes to new releases. Maybe we'll see CS4 by the end of 2009.

[iSee]

What's on tap for Flash?

[samwich]

http://www.flashcs4.com/

description of some new features

[Saladinos]

Without 64-bit, it's not worth it.

Bad decision on Adobe's part. They knew Apple's 64-bit roadmap once Leopard was released. They knew that there'd be a far greater 64-bit user base on OSX than Windows x64.

The good knews is that they've now got the time and incentive to work on redoing Photoshop in Cocoa. CS5 should be a good one.

[Sdashiki]

If they cant cross application Flash, I dont give a flying f---

Where is the EASY integration of all things Flash into Photoshop or Illustrator? Or even Acrobat!?

[happydude]

another ridiculously expensive update for features i probably won't use . . . not planning on upgrading unless something incredible is updated/added/changed

[eyehop]

I sure hope the resolved the issues with their UI. Dreamweaver CS4 beta functionality has been horrid on a (new) mac.

[punkybadhip]

Adobe ruined macromedia's products! Company of garbage (best way of saying it within the T&C)

[punkybadhip]

I sure hope the resolved the issues with their UI. Dreamweaver CS4 beta functionality has been horrid on a (new) mac.

I use Rapidweaver, plus blocks plugin. Much better, and will never use DW again, since it has been Adobified.

You might want to give it a try.

[manhattanboy]

I always loved the creative suites... but always hated the prices...

[Tosser]

Soundbooth CS4 Non-beta!!! :D

Finally I can officially ditch Apple "pro" audio apps entirely!

[manhattanboy]

Without 64-bit, it's not worth it.

Bad decision on Adobe's part. They knew Apple's 64-bit roadmap once Leopard was released. They knew that there'd be a far greater 64-bit user base on OSX than Windows x64.

The good knews is that they've now got the time and incentive to work on redoing Photoshop in Cocoa. CS5 should be a good one.

to give them some slack...Apple already moved to 64 bit with the G5 and then did a nice ***** in the face of its developers by moving back to 32-bit with intel.

[bit density]

For those that use Adobe Products for a living, a new upgrade cycle is like free money. There is always something that makes up for the cost. Improved productivity or functionality. But it is always worth it.

For the casual user, yes, it is often too much. And unfortunately it is often impossible to buy the right amount.

But if you are making, producing, printing or publishing material for a living. Which is for the most part who the product is for. You are generally talking about 3-4 days salary per workstation, and you honestly make that back each and every time.

[Small White Car]

I find that with Adobe CS updates it's very easy to skip generations.

I want from CS1 to CS3 and I was perfectly happy with that. I think I'll make the jump from 3 right to 5 when it comes out in a few years.

With Final Cut and Mac OS updates, I'm first in line. But with Adobe, I find the changes to be minimal enough that I can go another 2 or 3 years without having the newest version.

[Tosser]

For those that use Adobe Products for a living, a new upgrade cycle is like free money. There is always something that makes up for the cost. Improved productivity or functionality. But it is always worth it.

For the casual user, yes, it is often too much. And unfortunately it is often impossible to buy the right amount.

But if you are making, producing, printing or publishing material for a living. Which is for the most part who the product is for. You are generally talking about 3-4 days salary per workstation, and you honestly make that back each and every time.

Very true, BD.

[manhattanboy]

BS. I'll believe it when I see it. Besides Microsoft, I think Adobe has one of the slowest roll outs when it comes to new releases. Maybe we'll see CS4 by the end of 2009.

MS for awhile was releasing OS's like crazy... Windows 98, ME, XP all with a few years. Then EVERYONE complained that there were too many so they stopped, put their blinders on and ironically released Vista.

[Small White Car]

Bad decision on Adobe's part. They knew Apple's 64-bit roadmap once Leopard was released. They knew that there'd be a far greater 64-bit user base on OSX than Windows x64.


Well, to this day, Final Cut Pro, Finder, and iTunes are all still Carbon apps too.

I don't really fault Adobe for thinking that they still had time when Apple themselves hasn't updated those 3 apps. Because those are, you know, some pretty important ones for Apple.

Obviously, they were wrong, but hindsight is 20/20. CS4 could have been 64 bit, but Apple changed their mind right before Leopard came out and killed that chance. The point is, Leopard was SUPPOSED to support it, but Apple dropped it from Leopard at the last minute. I can't really fault Adobe for not knowing something Apple THEMSELVES didn't even know at the time. The instant it happened, Adobe started working on it. It's just going to take them more than 1 year is all.

[happydude]

For those that use Adobe Products for a living, a new upgrade cycle is like free money. There is always something that makes up for the cost. Improved productivity or functionality. But it is always worth it.

For the casual user, yes, it is often too much. And unfortunately it is often impossible to buy the right amount.

But if you are making, producing, printing or publishing material for a living. Which is for the most part who the product is for. You are generally talking about 3-4 days salary per workstation, and you honestly make that back each and every time.

i'm sure adobe is cutting the check and sending it to you right now . . . :p

[KindredMAC]

Another upgrade from Adobe I won't buy because it does very little more than the last version does.
And you know that it does very little more how? I assume you must be an Adobe Alpha tester, oh wait.... you said you wouldn't BUY it. Well most Alpha testers I know get a copy for free anyways... So I guess your post means nothing then.

another ridiculously expensive update for features i probably won't use . . . not planning on upgrading unless something incredible is updated/added/changed
If you don't use the features then you probably fall into the novice category or the "desktop publishing" career base. However for professional Graphic Designers, CS4 will most likely bring a slew of much wanted features to make OUR lives easier.

If any of you guys don't want it, DON'T GET IT.
It's so easy for everyone to be so negative.... almost to the point of trolling.

[puckhead193]

jesus they just came out with CS3:eek:

[HLdan]

Adobe ruined macromedia's products! Company of garbage (best way of saying it within the T&C)

Completely agreed, things were so much better when Macromedia owned Flash and the support was great on the Macintosh.

[MBX]

jesus they just came out with CS3:eek:

I thought so too. But maybe time just passes us by without us noticing. We can't keep up anymore, our brains are overwhelmed with the todays technology and information flow.

On another note the CS4 release might be an indicator of new MacBook Pro's, who knows.

[l'homme]

When is Apple going to introduce an Adobe CS like?!
I'm getting sick of Adobe's preference to Windows user base.

Adobe went from Mac niche to Windows mainstream, that's a good money maker equation for Adobe, but isn't a deal for Mac users and product quality at all.

Bring it on Apple!

[AidenShaw]

Without 64-bit, it's not worth it.

Bad decision on Adobe's part. They knew Apple's 64-bit roadmap once Leopard was released.

Adobe thought that they knew Apple's 64-bit roadmap during Leopard betas - but Apple screwed them by changing the plan and withdrawing needed support.


They knew that there'd be a far greater 64-bit user base on OSX than Windows x64.

Or maybe not....

"the installed base of 64-bit Vista systems 'has more than tripled in the U.S. in the last three months.'"

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/15239

Sorry about adding some facts to your opinions....


The good knews is that they've now got the time and incentive to work on redoing Photoshop in Cocoa. CS5 should be a good one.

Or not. Perhaps by 2010 all the serious graphics professionals will be using 64-bit CS4 on Windows 7 x64 (the Vista kit will run on Windows 7), and Adobe might decide that 32-bit Carbon is all that the amateur Apple users need.

Apple changed their publicly committed deliverables, no issue if Adobe does the same, right?


to give them some slack...Apple already moved to 64 bit with the G5 and then did a nice ***** in the face of its developers by moving back to 32-bit with intel.

So true - Apple was stupid to ship any Yonah systems. If they'd waited a few months more for Merom - then all Intel Apples would have been x64 systems.

It may have made sense for earnings for one quarter, but it doesn't make sense for the platform. Dumb move, Jobs. Really dumb move.

[motulist]

I am not a graphic artist, so please clear this up for me. Photoshop is already so uber-powerful, what the heck else can this new version offer that you care about?

[nostaws]

Speaking of Macromedia:

I want Freehand back!

Sorry, I couldn't resist :D But I do miss it:(

[zoozx]

This CS crap is annoying. Insignificant upgrades, ridiculous pricing.
More bells and whistles without any new usable professional tools.

[Kevin L.]

Argh! I just bought CS3, but I could have waited a month for CS4. Now it will cost something like $400 MORE if I want to update to the "latest". (Not that I really care about the latest features, but it's always frustrating buying something then finding out it's already outdated... kinda like the nano I just bought.)

[thebrain74]

I do sympathize with those who hate what Adobe has done to certain Macromedia products. I myself was sorry to see Freehand go as I learned Vector art on it, and probably would have never got Illustrator if Macromedia hadn't been bought. That being said Illustrator does kick the pants off of Freehand. I'm not convinced its interface is better, but boy can it do stuff Freehand can only dream of. Gradient Mesh, Are you kidding me! That alone nearly revolutionized my vector work.

I think I will skip CS4 though, I just got CS3 last year, and even with the student discount it wasn't cheep (I know, I know its priced for professionals, and I use it for jobs not just to play around, still $$$$). I still need to uncover more of CS3's tricks before I will feel the need for CS4. CS5 sound like it could be a solid release though.

I am torn between Apple pro-apps and Adobe apps though. I like Illustrator and Photoshop (to a point, but god its interface is bad), I can't decide between Aperture and Lightroom, but I have been very effective in FCE.

P.S. why is Bridge so darn slow? (I am on a MBP 2.2SR with 4gig ram)

[wheezy]

Ya know, if Adobe upgrades their stupid Updater to not hog your entire system when it randomly starts, then CS4 might be a good idea. </half sarcasm>

I think Adobe is superior in the creative field, but I think the pricing is pretty steep. And I hope they drop the 30 different kinds of 'packages' you can buy (Vista anyone?) and just let you "a'la'carte" the apps you want, pick 2 for $xxxx, 3 for $xx,xxx or all of them for $arm_and_leg.01.

[Moof1904]

Speaking of Macromedia:

I want Freehand back!

Sorry, I couldn't resist :D But I do miss it:(


Yeah, me too, but FreeHand was dead before the Adobe merger. Macromedia had put FreeHand in "maintenance mode" and moved its bug-fix only maintenance to India long before the Adobe thing.

[Analog Kid]

to give them some slack...Apple already moved to 64 bit with the G5 and then did a nice ***** in the face of its developers by moving back to 32-bit with intel.
I know, and then they went and shipped 32bit ARM processors in iPhone...

No wonder Adobe is screwing over Mac professionals.
"the installed base of 64-bit Vista systems 'has more than tripled in the U.S. in the last three months.'"

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/15239

Sorry about adding some facts to your opinions....

Some Vista team blog post says Vista 64 is selling gangbusters, really, you gotta believe me, and that's a fact?

Not that the original comment had any support, but you're not refuting it any more strongly. Even if they did triple a small number, it doesn't suggest Vista64 is a majority of 64bit Adobe users.

[skellener]

Macromedia had put FreeHand in "maintenance mode"... Snow Leopard if forcing Adobe to FINALLY rewrite their creaky old code. Amen! Hopefully we'll finally see some speed improvements and native support from them. They should have done this YEARS ago but waited and milked the public for almost a decade. It's time for Mac users to put upgrading their Adobe apps in "maintenance mode". Just wait for CS5.

[jmooring]

I'd like to see some persistent bugs crushed before I pony up for a whole new version. I'm interested in benefits, not features.

[danbirchall]

I *just* bought CS3.3, because some folks I work with have been harassing me to get CS3 ever since one of them got a Vista laptop that can't run CS2. :(

They'd better not ask me to get CS4. I really don't want to buy any more Adobe products until they're in Cocoa.

[MBX]

To be honest Photoshop CS4 does have some hot new features.

It's not true that Adobe doesn't release good enough updates. Maybe that was true before CS3 but CS3 was a major update imho with some great features i can't live without today anymore in the photoshop world. I also welcomed the cool interface redesign.

It's a shame the 64bit version won't be available until CS5 but then again time fly's by quickly.

[Eddyisgreat]

BS. I'll believe it when I see it. Besides Microsoft, I think Adobe has one of the slowest roll outs when it comes to new releases. Maybe we'll see CS4 by the end of 2009.

Lol ok.

Keep saying that by the end of this year.

[Saladinos]

Soundbooth CS4 Non-beta!!! :D

Finally I can officially ditch Apple "pro" audio apps entirely!

Is Soundbooth really that good? From what I've read, it's a non-pro application (I've used Audition in the past, and wasn't blown away. This is apparently a babified version).

Logic Studio seems perfectly fine for me. It's one of Apple's better pro applications IMO.

[Eddyisgreat]

Ya know, if Adobe upgrades their stupid Updater to not hog your entire system when it randomly starts, then CS4 might be a good idea. </half sarcasm>

I think Adobe is superior in the creative field, but I think the pricing is pretty steep. And I hope they drop the 30 different kinds of 'packages' you can buy (Vista anyone?) and just let you "a'la'carte" the apps you want, pick 2 for $xxxx, 3 for $xx,xxx or all of them for $arm_and_leg.01.

LoL

There are currently 5 or so packages available, one thats cost effective for graphic artists, video professionals, web designers, or all of the above.

If that doesn't work for you, just grab a single App or two.

[Tosser]

Is Soundbooth really that good? From what I've read, it's a non-pro application (I've used Audition in the past, and wasn't blown away. This is apparently a babified version).

Logic Studio seems perfectly fine for me. It's one of Apple's better pro applications IMO.

It solely depends what you do. If you're doing music, then it's a no-no, but for my line of work SB CS4 is just the ticket, allowing me to do my work faster than before. I came from Peak+Deck, then tried STP for a while, returned to Peak+Deck, and when SB CS3 came out, I used that in combination ith first STP, then with Deck again.
With the advent of SB CS4, I can not only do my work faster (and thus better, as the trade off if working slow), but I get to use it crossplatform as well, which, to me, is worth much more than twice the app cost (I'm tired of having to work with protools and the like for what I do).

Is it a baby app? I don't think so. And if you must think of it as a baby app, then think of lightroom/aperture in relation to Photoshop. Yes it does less, but for what it is intended it's a much more effective app.

Anyway, the value of any app certainly depends what you're using it for.

[kaiwai]

What I'd love to see is a 'Home and Student' package which includes more than just one user licence. It isn't as though they'll lose money because of it.

[MindBrain]

What's the general consensus on Adobe CS3 and how well it runs on MacOS Leopard as compared to WinXP?? I've always preferred MacOS to Windows and I'm looking to get a Mac Laptop and Adobe CS3 or 4 but I hear about bugs and stuff running on Leopard (that were not present in Tiger)

Like I said I'd prefer to use MacOS but if the current functionality is better on WinXP I'd have to go ahead and get a Windows laptop, considering I can apply a few tweaks to XP that make it somewhat maclike (mainly the Objectdock program)

So what's the current state of CS3 on MacOS Leopard??? How about CS4 is there any current info on how it is functioning on Mac???

[Master Atrus]

What's the general consensus on Adobe CS3 and how well it runs on MacOS Leopard as compared to WinXP?? I've always preferred MacOS to Windows and I'm looking to get a Mac Laptop and Adobe CS3 or 4 but I hear about bugs and stuff running on Leopard (that were not present in Tiger)

Like I said I'd prefer to use MacOS but if the current functionality is better on WinXP I'd have to go ahead and get a Windows laptop, considering I can apply a few tweaks to XP that make it somewhat maclike (mainly the Objectdock program)

So what's the current state of CS3 on MacOS Leopard??? How about CS4 is there any current info on how it is functioning on Mac???

I've been using CS 3 and now CS 3.3 on my MacBook for about a year now and I think it does great. My performance was much better on my MacBook Pro, but I ran into some computer trouble (my wife took it from me ;) )

I'm afraid I don't know anything about CS4 other than the beta of Dreamweaver and Fireworks I've been using and I must admit that I like the new layout. But to each his / her own.

There's my two cents and I gave it for free ...

[alphaod]

First time I can't pay student price :(

[moz5835]

I really enjoy Dreamweaver CS3 because it made the previous, non-Intel version look archaic and snail-paced on my 2006 Mac Mini Core Duo. Damn shame that's all it brought to my Mac party, but that's why I bought it.

Wait, wait - there's more. If you want some muscle - hand Adobe another bunch of $299 and the Developer's Toolkit is yours. I did that too.

Having handed over a fair chunk of personal (yes - not company) cash for this software I felt I needed, I have now learned to love it.

I started with Homesite. Beautiful software because it was so specific in purpose. It worked and had no surprises. It let me do what I needed to with all the help I needed when I needed it.

Homesite was absorbed into Dreamweaver by Macromedia. They were a company kinda cool because of Flash (which they also acquired).

Macromedia was small enough to care about Homesite, made Dreamweaver accommodate the Homesite crew and pulled us into the new world of what DW became in version 8. Bloatware aside (and any DW automated code was FAT back in DW 3, pre-Homesite).

Adobe bought out Macromedia. Love Adobe. Photoshop was the definitive standard for image editing, so this must be good.

Turns out not to be. JSP support fails. ASP - almost gone. Dreamweaver becomes the anti-Homesite. Somewhere in-between designers and coders. Casual web devs don't have 400 notes kicking about.

Worse still, better alternatives like Coda (http://www.panic.com/coda/) surfaced without the sticker shock or bloat.

So... Adobe... CS4. Yeh? What's in it for me? If the alpha/beta Adobe Labs code was anything to go by - a UI change sums it up.

Ben

bnlv.com

[MindBrain]

I've been using CS 3 and now CS 3.3 on my MacBook for about a year now and I think it does great. My performance was much better on my MacBook Pro, but I ran into some computer trouble (my wife took it from me ;) )

I'm afraid I don't know anything about CS4 other than the beta of Dreamweaver and Fireworks I've been using and I must admit that I like the new layout. But to each his / her own.

There's my two cents and I gave it for free ...

What exactly is CS 3.3? I remember people complaining about it being an update you had to pay for? Others saying it adds good features and is worth it.

In addition to adding features does it also fix bugs? I mean are there bug fixes you get in 3.3 that you can't get in 3?

I'm assuming if you buy CS3 now it automatically comes with 3.3 is this true?

If I decide to get a Mac laptop I'm gonna have to get it within the next couple months along with CS3 or 4 cause now I'm enrolled in school and I'll get the discount and I probably won't be enrolled for a while after this semester.

So what's the deal, do I wait for the next laptop refresh and get one with CS3? Get one and wait for CS4? Get a Windows XP and get CS3 or 4?

I'm thinking to get a Macbook or Macbook Pro when they're updated and get CS3 and forget CS4. But I don't know, I just want what will be most stable and smooth running.If CS 4 has that then I'd wait.

[KCMichaelB]

There goes my daughter's junior college fund!

[jonnos]

sucks that osx version wont be 64bit. i was hoping to purchase adobe creative suite before i finish university next year in nov. i dont graduate prob till march-ish though. would i still be considered a student? :D hopefully cs5 is out by then =\
when do you guys think 64bit osx version would come out?

[wheezy]

Turns out not to be. JSP support fails. ASP - almost gone. Dreamweaver becomes the anti-Homesite. Somewhere in-between designers and coders. Casual web devs don't have 400 notes kicking about.

Worse still, better alternatives like Coda (http://www.panic.com/coda/) surfaced without the sticker shock or bloat.

So... Adobe... CS4. Yeh? What's in it for me? If the alpha/beta Adobe Labs code was anything to go by - a UI change sums it up.

Ben

bnlv.com

Very well put. My boss still runs on Homesite and then Coda on his iMac, and he's just itching for Panic to add in a few more 'must have features' from Homesite and he'll be a happy coder.

I mainly got tired of the load time, the RAM usage, the _notes folders (which do what?!?!) and yeah... it was just too much. I left Dreamweaver awhile ago and never ever look back.

[angelneo]

The only reason I even care about this update is Flash, I have switched from Dreamweaver to Aptana for my Windows machine, and my current photoshop CS3 does pretty much what I want. God, how I hate their bloated hidden updater running in the background sucking up all the "free" bandwidth.

[Brien]

I find that with Adobe CS updates it's very easy to skip generations.

I want from CS1 to CS3 and I was perfectly happy with that. I think I'll make the jump from 3 right to 5 when it comes out in a few years.

With Final Cut and Mac OS updates, I'm first in line. But with Adobe, I find the changes to be minimal enough that I can go another 2 or 3 years without having the newest version.

I agree. I've noticed very few changes from Photoshop 7 to CS3. About the only feature that's new and useful to me is Smart layers. From what I've seen of Stonehenge, the new Adobe UI... sucks.

Even if Adobe is forced to redo their apps for Cocoa 64, I don't think they'll be any more 'Mac like' than the current iterations. Adobe likes to keep things consistent across platforms and they're going to share as much code as they can. It's too bad, because PS needs a major overhaul.

If they do manage, however, to get the Macromedia apps integrated nicely into the Adobe apps (unlike CS3) I'll probably buy this version. Heck, I'll probably get it just for Actionscript 4.

[bennifer3000]

Can't wait to illegally download this. Adobe can go screw. :mad: :rolleyes:

(Long story on Adobe hatred)

[Muzz]

I know I am bucking the consensus here, but I am really looking forward to CS4. CS3 was a great leap forward for Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign (the programs I use the most) mainly in how all three programs play nice with each other now.

I expect good things with CS4, looking at what I have seen so far. The interface changes are not a big deal. From what they have said if you don't like the new interface you can revert to the old one.

If only they could update Freehand as well and put it in the suite I would be REALLY happy. Illustrator has a lot of great features, but Jeez... that masking mess has to go!

[Shagrat]

Is Soundbooth really that good? From what I've read, it's a non-pro application (I've used Audition in the past, and wasn't blown away. This is apparently a babified version).

Logic Studio seems perfectly fine for me. It's one of Apple's better pro applications IMO.

Well, all I can say is if Tosser thinks that Soundbooth is better than Logic Pro, then he certainly IS a tosser!

[Erwin-Br]

So I read that Snow Leopard is forcing Adobe to go 64bit in their future versions. - Have I missed something? Are 32bit apps not supported on Snow Leopard? (Sorry if this is a dumb question, I'm kind of out of the loop on SL)

--Erwin

[newb16]

So I read that Snow Leopard is forcing Adobe to go 64bit in their future versions. - Have I missed something? Are 32bit apps not supported on Snow Leopard? (Sorry if this is a dumb question, I'm kind of out of the loop on SL)

They are forcing them to rewrite the whole app (written in Carbon) in Cocoa if they want 64 bit version. Adobe expected 64-bit carbon but was screwed.
Google for 'apple drop carbon 64'.

[Monty Pavement]

Hopefully Adobe will have abandoned their rip-off pricing for European customers, where some of the packages cost more in £s than they did in $, despite the tumbling dollar.

Not holding my breath though ...

[opeter]

I do have a question: will there be still a 3 - 3,50 GB barrier for RAM in Photoshop?

http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20080716133717914

Anyway i always felt, that the PC version of these Adobe apps were much more quicker, than the Mac version under OSX. At the time i had my PowerMac G5 1,8 GHz DP with 4 GB RAM, Photoshop CS1 and also InDesign CS1 were much faster (it really had the feeling) and responsible on a Pentium 4 3200 MHz with 3 GB RAM under Windows XP than on my Mac with Tiger 10.4.x.

So i think, that the whole Apples marketing about PPC vs. Intel MHz myth was just a ******** lie... anyway, now i am happy quite happy with Windows XP 64-bit.

And also, the 64-bit Windows user base is constantly growing. Thats why the Windows packages will be the first, that will get the 64-bit applications.

Any news about a Linux verison of Adobe Creative Suite package?

[AidenShaw]

it doesn't suggest Vista64 is a majority of 64bit Adobe users.

100% of 64-bit CS4 Adobe users will be on Windows when CS4 is released.

[ATG]

Without 64-bit, it's not worth it.

Bad decision on Adobe's part. They knew Apple's 64-bit roadmap once Leopard was released. They knew that there'd be a far greater 64-bit user base on OSX than Windows x64.

The good knews is that they've now got the time and incentive to work on redoing Photoshop in Cocoa. CS5 should be a good one.
Have you got any idea how difficult it is to rewrite an entire suit of applications using a new programming language and APIs? We're talking millions of lines here. Apple is clearly trying to give Adobe (and other Carbon developers) a nudge to Cocoa by neglecting 64-bit support in Carbon, but rewriting CS4 isn't something Adobe can do overnight - it'll take time.

[Snips]

Hopefully Adobe will have abandoned their rip-off pricing for European customers, where some of the packages cost more in £s than they did in $, despite the tumbling dollar.

Not holding my breath though ...

Absolutely.

I had to think long and hard before buying Illustrator CS3 as it was so expensive, and the unjustifiable rip-off UK price rubbed salt into the wound.

That said, I did buy it, and it does rock. Like a well paced game, I'm learning how to use it step-by-step, and most things I want to do, it can do - might expect stronger 3D support though - 3D cubes, anyone?

Overall, I'm satisfied with the product, though aggrieved at the US vs. UK pricing.

btw, on the back of that I just bought Web Design Standard CS3, which I'm just getting started with.

I'm not concerned with CS4 coming out, because I'm benefiting from the wealth of CS3 tutorials already out there on the web - another benefit of buying a big brand product like Illustrator.

[skellener]

Have you got any idea how difficult it is to rewrite an entire suit of applications using a new programming language and APIs? We're talking millions of lines here. Apple is clearly trying to give Adobe (and other Carbon developers) a nudge to Cocoa by neglecting 64-bit support in Carbon, but rewriting CS4 isn't something Adobe can do overnight - it'll take time.Apple has been giving Adobe the "nudge" since OS X debuted. APPLE WROTE CARBON FOR ADOBE!!! (and MS and Macromedia, etc). Who's the last one to come to the party on OS X?? Adobe! I will never shed a tear for Adobe having to write code. Writing software is what Adobe does. That is their job. Carbon NEVER forced you to rewrite your entire app anyway. Only a small portion. They should have taken advantage and just done it. Adobe should have jumped on the train long ago. They decided not to and are paying the price now - uh, Mac users are paying the price now. Adobe is a dinosaur. I see most of their apps being supplanted in the next 5 years anyway whether it be by Apple or some other Mac developer.

[AidenShaw]

Apple has been giving Adobe the "nudge" since OS X debuted. APPLE WROTE CARBON FOR ADOBE!!! (and MS and Macromedia, etc). Who's the last one to come to the party on OS X?? Adobe! I will never shed a tear for Adobe having to write code. Writing software is what Adobe does. That is their job. Carbon NEVER forced you to rewrite your entire app anyway. Only a small portion. They should have taken advantage and just done it. Adobe should have jumped on the train long ago. They decided not to and are paying the price now - uh, Mac users are paying the price now.

Seriously, please tell me how and why CS5 will be a better experience for the user because of Cocoa.

Since Photoshop and other Adobe apps are often run full screen, and use their own UI metaphors, how will Cocoa enrich the experience?

Apple has been forcing developers to spend enormous amounts of money just to stay in the same place (OS9 -> OSX migration, PPC -> x86 migration, now the x86 to x64 migration,...), which not only adds bugs but makes it more difficult to add features.

Microsoft works hard to help developers, but Apple seems to work against them.

[The Tall One]

What the hell man!!!!! I just got through getting CS3!!!!! Slow down dammit!

[DigiCatRedux]

My company upgrades to whatever "new" version of programs are out there - design dept, financial, etc, all the time. Hell, even the secretary managed to get the company to spring for the last version of iTunes because we use it to pipe music through the place. (which reminds me, I need to secretly replace all the tracks in the company playlist with Slayer & W.A.S.P. sometime).

However, although it's cool we try to stay up-to-date with new software, I will have to say I was slightly....underwhelmed when CS3 made it to our desktops. I certainly didn't see anything that I myself personally thought warranted another bucketload of cash going into Adobes coffers.

Maybe this latest CS4 will justify the price, and correct a few issues that others here have mentioned about the previous release.
I'll be looking forward to trying it out - but I'm not expecting anything truly Earth-shattering. Prove me wrong, Adobe!

[J@ffa]

Hell, even the secretary managed to get the company to spring for the last version of iTunes because we use it to pipe music through the place.

Woah. How did she manage to swing that? iTunes costs an absolute fortune!*

* :D :p

[gearkraft]

As a graphic design major I'm a little upset by this announcement. On top of many other fees and expenses I will have to upgrade yet again... Id like to see a few year break in which they look at upcoming technology and incorporate optimization and streamlining between different programs. As a person who primarily works in print based design, there's a gap in the way InDesign, Photoshop, and Illustrator all integrate. Thats what I want to pay for.

[Tosser]

Well, all I can say is if Tosser thinks that Soundbooth is better than Logic Pro, then he certainly IS a tosser!

Do you even know what you're talking about?

Did you not read the reasoning behind it?

I'm sorry but your statement is as ignorant as saying that a truck is per definition better than a sportscar, or that photoshop is per definition better than lightroom/aperture.

I'm in broadcast and speed matters. Logic Pro is fine, but for my line of work Logic Pro is much more cumbersome and thus slower than Soundbooth, and with the advent of multitrack in SB CS4 it's even quicker from the moment I come home with my recordings to the moment I have my finished product.

Further, I get to use the same app on both the PC at work and my own computer. Oh, and even if people dislike Adobe, it seems that even Soundbooth CS4 Beta have less bugs than Apple's "pro" software. I'm tired of using products that are ignored by the company itself.

I'm tired of Apple's dwindling QC, so I'm looking for a way out, and this is the perfect route.

[donbadman]

why does it need an update so quicky is it to justify the ludicrous pricing for software which for all intents and purposes (professional use) hasn't added much since like forever man.

Seriously what else is there to do with illustrator photoshop and indesign?

[donbadman]

As a graphic design major I'm a little upset by this announcement. On top of many other fees and expenses I will have to upgrade yet again... Id like to see a few year break in which they look at upcoming technology and incorporate optimization and streamlining between different programs. As a person who primarily works in print based design, there's a gap in the way InDesign, Photoshop, and Illustrator all integrate. Thats what I want to pay for.

Why do you need to upgrade? I'm still running illustrator 10 and make a good living as a designer, and having the latest software won't make a design/er "better".

[Thomas2006]

jesus they just came out with CS3:eek:Wikipedia has the date as April, 2007. Looking at its history it appears Photoshop has an 18-24 month release cycle so an October release won't be out of the ordinary.

[nayxn2nayxn]

alright!!!! 2 more brushes and one more tutorial added in cs4

[Tosser]

alright!!!! 2 more brushes and one more tutorial added in cs4

LOL, I'm glad I don't have the problems PS-workers have :eek:

[Analog Kid]

100% of 64-bit CS4 Adobe users will be on Windows when CS4 is released.
Nice. Given the thread history, I obviously meant potential 64bit users when CS4 was developed...

[SwiftLives]

BS. I'll believe it when I see it. Besides Microsoft, I think Adobe has one of the slowest roll outs when it comes to new releases. Maybe we'll see CS4 by the end of 2009.

~18 months is pretty standard. Apple generally releases their OS updates within a similar timeframe. Not sure how you can compare that to Microsoft...

[polar-blair]

I have read alot of negative comments about adobe and CS3 ect... but Im happy about this update, Ive just started college and hopefully getting a new rumored MBP (when they come out) which should hopefully be released around the same time as CS4, My college still uses CS2 though and MP G4's running OSX 3.somin'

But this is good timing for me to get a student version :D

[SwiftLives]

So here's a really petty new feature I'd like to see:

Improved app icons. :)

[CortexRock]

Don't know if anyone else in the UK has spotted this, but Adobe have knocked about 10% off the list price of Creative Suite Design Premium (v3.3) - probably as a sweetener in the run-up to the release of CS4.

Ex VAT price is now only £1249... :eek:

[TwitchOSX]

We just bought CS 3.3 upgrade from CS2....

Came in the mail yesterday.

[TwitchOSX]

Don't know if anyone else in the UK has spotted this, but Adobe have knocked about 10% off the list price of Creative Suite Design Premium (v3.3) - probably as a sweetener in the run-up to the release of CS4.

Ex VAT price is now only £1249... :eek:

DO NOT BUY directly from Adobe. The upgrade price from CS2 to CS 3.3 on Adobe's online store was about $800.

We just got it for like $350 from Amazon

[pcharles]

I use Rapidweaver, plus blocks plugin. Much better, and will never use DW again, since it has been Adobified.

You might want to give it a try.

Uggh! Can't stand either of them. I just cannot get my head around the RW workflow and its lack of true WYSIWYG. It drives me crazy having to switch back and forth between edit and preview.

[relimw]

What exactly is CS 3.3? I remember people complaining about it being an update you had to pay for? Others saying it adds good features and is worth it.

In addition to adding features does it also fix bugs? I mean are there bug fixes you get in 3.3 that you can't get in 3?


If you already had CS3, going to CS3.3 is NOT worth it, unless you need Acrobat Pro 9 (which is all that is in the CS3.3 upgrade pack). None of the other apps changed.

[donbadman]

well ******* me I'm positively moist in anticipation...

I can't wait for another couple of hours reinstall a new loading screen and a couple of new filters, I just installed an old copy of PS6 and it's bloody quick how come cs3 is so slow on the same system? Is this progress or just taking the piss?

[csketch7]

as long as they make it have a new look i will get it :):apple:

[hawken king]

I hope they went through www.dearadobe.com with a fine toothcomb. We don't want new features, we want them to improve existing features and trim down the bloat.

[gearkraft]

Why do you need to upgrade? I'm still running illustrator 10 and make a good living as a designer, and having the latest software won't make a design/er "better".

Yes, I agree that is true, however using the most up to date software that is widely considered as the industry standard is a good idea. A year from now I will have graduated and be applying to design firms that will require that knowledge.

Many businesses required CS3 knowledge not long after it was introduced for their new employees. I would be slow and off not to follow suit.

on a side note however, I grew up on macromedia freehand and have missed it since its untimely death. Illustrator should have taken a page from its book, that is for damn sure.

[opeter]

Many businesses required CS3 knowledge not long after it was introduced for their new employees. I would be slow and off not to follow suit.

Hell, most of my customers cant even turn on the computer, and most of the printing-firms and prepresses i work here do have CorelDRAW.

On of the three prepress studios that exists here in my region have a few Macs with QuarkXpress 4 & 5... but, they finally got a RIP, that can handle PostScript 3 :o

[layte]

Not that the original comment had any support, but you're not refuting it any more strongly. Even if they did triple a small number, it doesn't suggest Vista64 is a majority of 64bit Adobe users.

180 Million is a small number?

That is 180M total Vista sales (of which 20% are x64, so 36M), hardly the failure some would have you believe, how many Macs were sold in the same time period

Edit: In answer to my own question, around 14.5M

[AidenShaw]

180 Million is a small number?

That is 180M total Vista sales (of which 20% are x64, so 36M), hardly the failure some would have you believe, how many Macs were sold in the same time period

Edit: In answer to my own question, around 14.5M

The real story in my earlier post is the shift to x64 Vista - an increasing percentage of Vista sales are for x64. Computer companies are selling 4 GiB systems and they need 64-bit to use it all. As memory prices drop, this trend will continue to grow.

Since Microsoft requires x64 support to get the Vista logo, there's not much worry about buying something and it not working on 64-bit.

[Nym]

Completely agreed, things were so much better when Macromedia owned Flash and the support was great on the Macintosh.

I have to disagree, I've been a Flash developer for a handful of years and I must say that since the days of Future Splash, the introduction of Actionscript 3.0 in Flash CS3 was the biggest leap that the Flash platform ever had! Actionscript 1 and 2 made no sense at all (imo), it was completely incoherent as a language and just horrible at doing basic stuff like loading and managing XML data.
The thing that still bothers me is that the performance of Flash Player 9 on Mac OS X seems slower (slower, not slow) than on the Windows side. I think that must be Adobe's fault and I've read that the next Flash Player 10 will have a big performance leap on the Mac side, I seriously hope that's true.

As for people saying that CS3 had no high value features I must say that, as far as I'm concerned, there was one main feature that justified the upgrade: Native support on Intel Macs! I had a horrible experience trying to run CS2 apps through Rosetta on an Intel Mac so the performance increase for me was more than enough, coupled with the better integration of Illustrator/Photoshop with Flash, win/win :cool:

I just hope that people Adobe can get Flash where it's supposed to be. Flash nowadays is just seen as an annoyance and a way to make animated/obtrusive ads that pop-out from everywhere. That is not what it's supposed to be!
Flash can be a very significant part of the internet if done right!
The problem is that the world is filled with "2 weeks watching tutorials" Flash "developers" that don't really know anything about Deep Linking, SEO, having a liquid layout, XML driven website structures and all the good basics that conscious Flash developers worry about.

Apple and Adobe have to solve their issues with one another.
What the hell am I going to do if Flash CS6 goes Windows only? Use Windows as my work OS?

Please....... nooooooooo :D

BTW, sorry for the long post, I had to vent... :rolleyes:

Exactly why I'm happy that my browser has a built-in "disable Flash" button that's almost always on.

Search for "flash blocker" to get rid of annoying flash ads.

I understand your pain... I am a Flash developer and even I have FlashBlock installed on Firefox because of the abuse that people use Flash for. But that's the same problem with a whole bunch of different technologies, I guess dumb people and bad professionals are everywhere right? :D I'm just saying that it can be done right, if it's the right team building the UI and programming the website/application.

[AidenShaw]

I just hope that people Adobe can get Flash where it's supposed to be. Flash nowadays is just seen as an annoyance and a way to make animated/obtrusive ads that pop-out from everywhere.

Exactly why I'm happy that my browser has a built-in "disable Flash" button that's almost always on.

Search for "flash blocker" to get rid of annoying flash ads.


I understand your pain... I am a Flash developer and even I have FlashBlock installed ...

Agree with you, I have some products where the entire UI is a flash web page. Flash can be done right.

[Analog Kid]

180 Million is a small number?

That is 180M total Vista sales (of which 20% are x64, so 36M), hardly the failure some would have you believe, how many Macs were sold in the same time period

Edit: In answer to my own question, around 14.5M
Are you telling me that Vista sells something like 2 billion copies a year? The only 20% number I see is as a percentage of units sold in June of '08, so if they're selling 180M units in June total, and we assume that's close to the average run rate, then they're selling something like 2.1billion units a year.

No, wait, Gates says (http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2008/05/08/gates-happy-with-rapid-sales-as-vista-hits-140-million-mark) they sold 140M units over the life of the product. That's 40 million more than he claimed about 4 months earlier, so we can assume a run rate of something on the order of 10M units a month. From this, we can pull two numbers:
20% of 10M is 2M.
3% of 10M is 300k.

And yes, I consider 300k a small number in the Windows world.

All of this, of course, assumes that just because someone connected to Windows update once they're continuing to use Vista64. Everything we know about Vista so far suggests that a lot of people are trying it and reverting to earlier versions-- I would expect to see this happen much more for the 64bit version which would induce more compatibility issues. Maybe they aren't changing back to XP, but could easily be changing to 32bit Vista.

Now, I don't know how many Macs have been sold in that time but what you really want to compare against is the installed base of Macs since Apple has been shipping 64bit hardware in some proportion since mid 2003.
The real story in my earlier post is the shift to x64 Vista - an increasing percentage of Vista sales are for x64.
No, the real story of your earlier post was meant to be adding facts to opinions, where Vista team blog posts substituted for facts:

Sorry about adding some facts to your opinions....

Talking about the shift towards Vista64 is an attempt to change the context from the original point which was that Adobe could have anticipated a larger 64bit user base on OS X, which turns out to look correct:
They knew Apple's 64-bit roadmap once Leopard was released. They knew that there'd be a far greater 64-bit user base on OSX than Windows x64.
That said, I'm not surprised that some Windows users are finding they want more than 3GB of RAM... I can't believe they've gone this long without it. So yes, I expect Windows 64bit numbers to continue to grow.

[Whiternoise]

// CS1 pricing
// CS2 pricing
// CS3 pricing
init CS4 pricing()
{

float us_price;
float uk_price;
float conversionrate;

//calculate UK price

uk_price = (us_price*conversionrate)*2.5 + a bit extra
}

It's the same old story i'll bet :(

[AidenShaw]

That said, I'm not surprised that some Windows users are finding they want more than 3GB of RAM... I can't believe they've gone this long without it.

...and I can't believe that you're so unaware of what's available in the Windows environment.


Windows XP 64-bit was released in April 2005 - Windows users who needed the memory space had it nearly 3½ years ago (and people running Windows server versions have had 64 GiB system support for years before that with PAE in Windows 2000).

You may notice that the Windows support was out before the laughable "support" for 64-bit in 10.4, and long before 10.5.

http://www.asisupport.com/windows_x64_banner.jpg

[Analog Kid]

Windows XP 64-bit was released in April 2005 - Windows users who needed the memory space had it nearly 3½ years ago (and people running Windows server versions have had 64 GiB system support for years before that with PAE in Windows 2000).

You may notice that the Windows support was out before the laughable "support" for 64-bit in 10.4, and long before 10.5.
Yep, and the takeup on that was just astounding wasn't it? All those happy customers are now clamoring for Vista64-- all 300 thousand of them...

The Vista team blog post you were making use of earlier starts with this sentence: "There appears to be a shift taking place in the PC industry: the move from 32-bit to 64-bit PCs."

I assume that shift is happening because it already happened in 2005? I seem to remember we were running into pretty stiff memory limits in 2005, but I can't remember why we didn't upgrade our machines to 64bit XP...

Oh wait, now I remember! No 64 bit application! "Not stable enough yet", they told us... Surely we could have just run our 32bit applications on XP 64 though, why didn't we? Right... No drivers!

[layte]

Now, I don't know how many Macs have been sold in that time but what you really want to compare against is the installed base of Macs since Apple has been shipping 64bit hardware in some proportion since mid 2003.

About 22 Million in March 2007 so lets be real kind and say Apple increased their userbase by 50% since then as this is the MacRumors Forum ;) . With Vista's sales numbers increasing (it increased by another 40M in only 3 months from Apr to Jul) and the trend showing takeup of x64 increasing (from 3% to 20% in the same time period) how long do you think it will take x64 Vista to overtake that number?

[andy721]

I thought this was out months ago? Everyone says it sucks or looks retarded. Waiting for CS5 or 65bit support which will never happen thank you adobe. Sticking to CS3....:mad:

[AidenShaw]

Yep, and the takeup on that was just astounding wasn't it?

Simply proof that 64-bit wasn't needed by very many people, and even today we're just starting to see mainstream users running into the 3.25 GiB limit.

Dare I point out the tiny, tiny percentage of Apple systems sold that can actually support more than 4 GiB of RAM?

It's too bad that so many people believe Apple's false and misleading ads.... (e.g. "first 64-bit desktop" - false because 64-bit desktops were available for 10 years before that, and misleading because there was no 64-bit support in the software)

Remember that I commented on the statement "I can't believe they've gone this long without it" - where "it" is support for large memory systems. I'm pointing out that 64-bit has been there longer on the Windows side than on the Apple side. Those who've "needed it" haven't been going without.

Spurious arguments like sales figures and misleading comments about driver support aren't relevant.

[opeter]

Heh, Commodore was also 64-bit :D

[Analog Kid]

About 22 Million in March 2007 so lets be real kind and say Apple increased their userbase by 50% since then as this is the MacRumors Forum ;) . With Vista's sales numbers increasing (it increased by another 40M in only 3 months from Apr to Jul) and the trend showing takeup of x64 increasing (from 3% to 20% in the same time period) how long do you think it will take x64 Vista to overtake that number?So yes, I expect Windows 64bit numbers to continue to grow.
Not long-- maybe a year?
Simply proof that 64-bit wasn't needed by very many people, and even today we're just starting to see mainstream users running into the 3.25 GiB limit.

Remember that I commented on the statement "I can't believe they've gone this long without it" - where "it" is support for large memory systems. I'm pointing out that 64-bit has been there longer on the Windows side than on the Apple side. Those who've "needed it" haven't been going without.
Now it's my turn to say "I can't believe that you're so unaware of what's available in the [OS X] environment".

Support for large memory systems has been available in OS X since 10.2.7 (http://www.macrumors.com/2003/08/19/mac-os-x-10-2-7-and-the-g5/) -- 2 years before 64bit XP.

Slow takeup on 64bit XP is also proof that MS wasn't able to deliver a fully functional product... Early 64bit support was aimed mostly at the server market-- which is why it was based on the Windows 2003 Server code. Maybe the servers were stable, I don't know. We needed workstation support and we went without. The application vendors pushed us to Linux/Solaris when we needed the memory.

As you point out the comment you are arguing against was my personal surprise that so many people have been subsisting on 3GB of RAM. Going through the forum archives, you'll see me as a voice arguing that 64bit doesn't help most people. I don't expect grandma to need 4GB to send email to the kids, but I'd have thought more professional users would have the same needs I do.

Such as Adobe's users, as an example that brings us back on topic...

Dare I point out the tiny, tiny percentage of Apple systems sold that can actually support more than 4 GiB of RAM?
"the installed base of 64-bit Vista systems 'has more than tripled in the U.S. in the last three months.'"

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/15239
Spurious arguments like sales figures ... aren't relevant.
:rolleyes:

[layte]

Support for large memory systems has been available in OS X since 10.2.7 (http://www.macrumors.com/2003/08/19/mac-os-x-10-2-7-and-the-g5/) -- 2 years before 64bit XP.


If we are getting nicely pedantic and talking about systems that can address more than 4GB of RAM I have a 2000 AS sitting in my server room happily using 6GB of RAM...

http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~layte/pics/hi2u6GB.png

[AidenShaw]

Support for large memory systems has been available in OS X since 10.2.7 (http://www.macrumors.com/2003/08/19/mac-os-x-10-2-7-and-the-g5/) -- 2 years before 64bit XP.

...and 3 1/2 years after Windows, in case you're counting. (Feb 2000 for 8 GiB support, Sep 2000 for 32 GiB support)

And yes, people would run Windows Server on a workstation for the memory addressability.

Out of curiousity, I checked a quote that I received at about the time of the 10.2.7 release - a single 2 GiB ECC DIMM (PC133) was $2800.

</tangent>