Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adobe Creative Suite 4 (CS4) Only a Minor Update?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, I've used their respective products forever, in particular Flash (since 1.0) and Photoshop (since 3.0). I've never had any major issues with Photoshop, but Flash was always a bug factory (and dont' get me started on Director...). In the beginning I used cracked versions so I thought I only had myself to blame, then one day I could finally afford to go legit and I thought ahhh, great, stable software and instant access to maintenance updates. Only to find that the legit version was just as unstable and that there were no maintenance updates to speak of. On the rare occasion that they released one, it usually fixed obscure stuff I never noticed, while glossing over the major issues that were staring you in the face.
So in my experience, poor quality control and reluctance to clean up the mess is a Macromedia tradition that carried over to Adobe after the merger -- not a new Adobe thing.
(The exception being Adobe Updater, which Macromedia probably can't be blamed for, it's so buggy it should be illegalized).
The two are kinda merging as the versions continue. But I'd have to go with all the Macromedia interfaces over Adobe's. Adobe was palette hell. And every app was differnet. Macromedia had the one standard properties pallette at the bottom in nearly every app. Highlight something, and most the things that you could do appeared in the pallette.
Every try GoLive? That was a nightmare. Good thing DW can import GoLive templates.
Flash CS4
Well, as I look at all the info and images out there on Flash CS4, I see that they have indeed screwed the properties panel and put it on the right like all the other Adobe panel crap.
That said, they've finally merged AE (LiveMotion) tech into Flash. Some of you may recall that Adobe put out an incredible Flash animation app called LiveMotion years ago. In fact, I still use it on Leopard and it works. Even though they discontinued it 5 years ago!
It is still light years ahead of Flash in drawing and animating. Actionscript, however is another story because LiveMotion is still stuck in 2002.
The big problem back then was that Adobe was always a Flash format version behind. They couldn't reverse engineer the tech until Macromedia came out with the latest version. So by the time LiveMotion 2 was encoding Flash 6 files, Flash (the program) was creating Flash 7 files, etc.
But not a big deal if all you're doing is making animations and interfaces. In fact, you hardly need to know a line of actionscript. I mean, what's up with all the actionscript you need to know to make a freakin button in flash? In LiveMotion, I simply highlight ANYTHING on the screen and go to the web pallette and enter the link address. It can be a full address or relative or absolute or whatever. That's it. The actionscript is of course created by LiveMotion on export. Why the hell should anyone know programming to create a LINK? Let's hope flash CS4 steals from LiveMotion in this way too.
Well, as I look at all the info and images out there on Flash CS4, I see that they have indeed screwed the properties panel and put it on the right like all the other Adobe panel crap.
That said, they've finally merged AE (LiveMotion) tech into Flash. Some of you may recall that Adobe put out an incredible Flash animation app called LiveMotion years ago. In fact, I still use it on Leopard and it works. Even though they discontinued it 5 years ago!
It is still light years ahead of Flash in drawing and animating. Actionscript, however is another story because LiveMotion is still stuck in 2002.
The big problem back then was that Adobe was always a Flash format version behind. They couldn't reverse engineer the tech until Macromedia came out with the latest version. So by the time LiveMotion 2 was encoding Flash 6 files, Flash (the program) was creating Flash 7 files, etc.
But not a big deal if all you're doing is making animations and interfaces. In fact, you hardly need to know a line of actionscript. I mean, what's up with all the actionscript you need to know to make a freakin button in flash? In LiveMotion, I simply highlight ANYTHING on the screen and go to the web pallette and enter the link address. It can be a full address or relative or absolute or whatever. That's it. The actionscript is of course created by LiveMotion on export. Why the hell should anyone know programming to create a LINK? Let's hope flash CS4 steals from LiveMotion in this way too.
I saw a preview of AE CS4 at the creativecow.net (I'd point you to it, however, per Adobe's request the article has been removed.) Either way, they were either holding back a lot of stuff OR your version of "huge" is way different than mine.
What I saw was pretty lackluster. New "Find" feature, mini-flow, couple new effects, 3D objects (a la Photoshop - boring.) Individual transformation for X,Y,Z. Camera movement via left, middle, right click. XFL export. Can't remember much more - but that's the point. Not remarkable to me.
What am I missing?
It's a matter of preference... Back in the old 4:3 days it made sense to have the properties panel at the bottom, but now with widescreen it's become a waste of screen real estate. On my laptop with a 1680x1050 screen, only half of the Properties panel in Flash CS3 has any content, the right half is empty. With the Timeline at the top and the Properties panel hogging the bottom, the Stage area becomes this narrow horizontal strip... and 1680x1050 is pretty high for a laptop, most 15.4" screens are 1440x900 or even 1280x768.
I think the widescreen & laptop revolutions may be part of the reason why Adobe keeps trying to make make the palettes smaller and easier to manage and minimize. Back when all designers were on a dual monitor desktop setup, Adobe and Macromedia could waste all the space they wanted. At my office I have a 4960x1600 3-monitor setup and my only problem with that is trying to fill the space, no matter how many Flash palettes I enable... but I also work a lot on my laptop, and the Properties panel is the one thing I keep having to toggle on/off to enjoy a decent workspace. So I for one am thrilled about getting rid of it in CS4.
Anyone have any further info on CS4's utilisation of the machine's GPU? I will be buying a new mac laptop in the coming month and am toying between MB and MBP. I have a good monitor for home use and can figure out spec advantages (and of course cost) for myself, except for the potential use of the GPU in CS4. I'm a photographer so I use Photoshop, Bridge (possibly Lightroom in the future) and Dreamweaver. What advantages may the MBP's GPU offer for these applications, and would the price and portability hit of a MBP over a MB be worth it?
Or Apple could just release a 12" MBP for me...
Or Apple could just release a 12" MBP for me...
why cs4 matters
Minor or Major Updates aside, I think the real importance of CS4 will be the full integration of the former macromedia applications into the adobe fold. This means consistent UI, keyboard shortcuts, and workflows. This also means further integration and cohesiveness. The aquisition of macromedia was a big deal and it must be difficult to combine staff, ideas, and egos to make the new software (think apple + next when making os X 10.0).
With that said, I think competition is always a good thing, as it tends to lower prices and force developers to make better or more useful software. But unlike microsoft, I am not afraid of Adobe's marketshare dominance (yet). The reason is that I get a sense that the wonderful people at adobe make software because they have a genuine, intrinsic interest in it, where as at microsoft, the only people who care are in R&D (cool ideas, but they rarely get used - surface being the exception to the rule). Anyways, I say this because if you've ever met an Adobe rep, read the Adobe blogs, or read official forum posts by adobe team members, they show that they have a desire to make better tools that they themselves use, and they see themselves as users too. This in no way guarentees consistent or timely innovation, but i do think that it is likely that we wont' be let down anytime soon.
Don't get me wrong though, I wish corel, or Microsoft (with their expression line) would make something better then what Adobe does - it would force Adobe to one up them! I use Adobe products because for me, they are the best creative apps out there. Sure, I use many other companie's software too for creative work, but CS3 is at the core of my software toolset. Sure, I have a bias favoring adobe, but thats only because they have a proven track reccord of making great software! However, I am hardware/software agnostic in that I'll always use the best tool for the job, though I'm more likely to stick with what i know if their aren't signifigantly better options out there. For example, I love after effects timeline / keyframing features, but apple motoins realtime editing/playback/audio features has gotten me to buy and try to learn it. I hope AE gets these features, but until it does, I'll be using motion simply because I think pre-composing / exporting draft versions / RAM previews suck balls. I mean its freaking 2008 and AE can't play audio in real time with the visuals? I mean don't most motion graphics pieces contain audio that needs to be synched with video? WTF mate!
I realize this rant is fairly long, but if you read this far I hope these ideas paint the adobe situation in what i feel is a more realistic light. Rather then looking at CS4 as an upgrade from CS3 (just another software version) The bigger picture is what CS4 will say about the new directions that the revamped Adobe company is going in - and how adobe hasn't steered us wrong yet.
p.s. now that i"m thinking about software, I must add that I miss Fractal Design / Creature house (the origional creators of painter and expression) as I felt like they were some of the most artist/design centric software creators out there. Sure their software had some usability quirks, but many features that have yet to be implamented in current software. Its too bad Corel can't innovate nor do they try to take risks or think indipendantly about their products. I"ve never used MS expression products, so I can't comment on their quality, but I do wish they would make the expression line of software cross platform and push the software more in terms of marketing / advertising that it even exists.
If anything though, I think there is a surge of 3rd party, indipendant graphics apps comming out now, at least on the mac. Apps like acorn and pixelmator show that competition is still around, albiet in a smaller way for the time being. its a shame that on the pc side, software such as dogwaffle and opencavas arnen't updated as much and seem to only be known to a few who are as geeky as I.
So yean, i'm excited to see CS4 because at the end of the day its a new toy to play with. CS4 is used by so many people that it won't please everyone, and may piss off a few, but as long as they don't remove features, increase startup times, or increase stability, I can't really complain. However, that is asking for a lot. Feature bloat alone can kill off good software. So even if CS4 doesn't offer as many new 'features' as you would like, some more spit n' polish is just what the DR. ordered for mission critical software, and to be quite honest, new features are exciting, but 6 months down the line, how many new features will you really be using anyways? New isn't always better, but improved always is. And thats how the cookie crumbles.
Minor or Major Updates aside, I think the real importance of CS4 will be the full integration of the former macromedia applications into the adobe fold. This means consistent UI, keyboard shortcuts, and workflows. This also means further integration and cohesiveness. The aquisition of macromedia was a big deal and it must be difficult to combine staff, ideas, and egos to make the new software (think apple + next when making os X 10.0).
With that said, I think competition is always a good thing, as it tends to lower prices and force developers to make better or more useful software. But unlike microsoft, I am not afraid of Adobe's marketshare dominance (yet). The reason is that I get a sense that the wonderful people at adobe make software because they have a genuine, intrinsic interest in it, where as at microsoft, the only people who care are in R&D (cool ideas, but they rarely get used - surface being the exception to the rule). Anyways, I say this because if you've ever met an Adobe rep, read the Adobe blogs, or read official forum posts by adobe team members, they show that they have a desire to make better tools that they themselves use, and they see themselves as users too. This in no way guarentees consistent or timely innovation, but i do think that it is likely that we wont' be let down anytime soon.
Don't get me wrong though, I wish corel, or Microsoft (with their expression line) would make something better then what Adobe does - it would force Adobe to one up them! I use Adobe products because for me, they are the best creative apps out there. Sure, I use many other companie's software too for creative work, but CS3 is at the core of my software toolset. Sure, I have a bias favoring adobe, but thats only because they have a proven track reccord of making great software! However, I am hardware/software agnostic in that I'll always use the best tool for the job, though I'm more likely to stick with what i know if their aren't signifigantly better options out there. For example, I love after effects timeline / keyframing features, but apple motoins realtime editing/playback/audio features has gotten me to buy and try to learn it. I hope AE gets these features, but until it does, I'll be using motion simply because I think pre-composing / exporting draft versions / RAM previews suck balls. I mean its freaking 2008 and AE can't play audio in real time with the visuals? I mean don't most motion graphics pieces contain audio that needs to be synched with video? WTF mate!
I realize this rant is fairly long, but if you read this far I hope these ideas paint the adobe situation in what i feel is a more realistic light. Rather then looking at CS4 as an upgrade from CS3 (just another software version) The bigger picture is what CS4 will say about the new directions that the revamped Adobe company is going in - and how adobe hasn't steered us wrong yet.
p.s. now that i"m thinking about software, I must add that I miss Fractal Design / Creature house (the origional creators of painter and expression) as I felt like they were some of the most artist/design centric software creators out there. Sure their software had some usability quirks, but many features that have yet to be implamented in current software. Its too bad Corel can't innovate nor do they try to take risks or think indipendantly about their products. I"ve never used MS expression products, so I can't comment on their quality, but I do wish they would make the expression line of software cross platform and push the software more in terms of marketing / advertising that it even exists.
If anything though, I think there is a surge of 3rd party, indipendant graphics apps comming out now, at least on the mac. Apps like acorn and pixelmator show that competition is still around, albiet in a smaller way for the time being. its a shame that on the pc side, software such as dogwaffle and opencavas arnen't updated as much and seem to only be known to a few who are as geeky as I.
So yean, i'm excited to see CS4 because at the end of the day its a new toy to play with. CS4 is used by so many people that it won't please everyone, and may piss off a few, but as long as they don't remove features, increase startup times, or increase stability, I can't really complain. However, that is asking for a lot. Feature bloat alone can kill off good software. So even if CS4 doesn't offer as many new 'features' as you would like, some more spit n' polish is just what the DR. ordered for mission critical software, and to be quite honest, new features are exciting, but 6 months down the line, how many new features will you really be using anyways? New isn't always better, but improved always is. And thats how the cookie crumbles.
Yeah, the worst thing about Adobe's acquisition of Macromedia is that it eliminated the only thing that even resembles competition. Now there's Adobe, nothing, nothing, nothing, and then there's MS and Corel. Anyone who's ever tried highjumping without a crossbar knows that you can't even jump half as high if there's nothing to aim for. When CS3 was released they still had the joint competitive momentum of both companies, but CS4 is the one release that will reveal whether they've gotten complacent at the top.
Reminders of tomorrow's webcast have been dispatched: http://mail.adobe-direct.com/v?xJvJJvPEcPHHWvPTv
Uh... what the hell is up with these upgrade prices?
I used to be a Macromedia Studio 8 owner, and when I upgraded (or perhaps crossgraded is a more appropriate term) from Studio 8 to CS3 Web Premium, I got Photoshop Extended, Illustrator and Acrobat (neither of which I owned before). So, apart from upgrades to Flash, Dreamweaver and Fireworks, I also got brand new licenses for Photoshop, Illustrator and Acrobat. All for a total of 5820 SEK.
But now that I am a full Photoshop + Illustrator + Flash + Acrobat + Fireworks + Dreamweaver licensee, they want 6975 SEK for the underwhelming CS4 upgrade...? Ha! Fat chance. Hey Adobe, call me when the clearance sale starts, I might willing to pick up one of your millions of unsold CS4 upgrades for 1500 SEK. "Might" being the operative word.
I used to be a Macromedia Studio 8 owner, and when I upgraded (or perhaps crossgraded is a more appropriate term) from Studio 8 to CS3 Web Premium, I got Photoshop Extended, Illustrator and Acrobat (neither of which I owned before). So, apart from upgrades to Flash, Dreamweaver and Fireworks, I also got brand new licenses for Photoshop, Illustrator and Acrobat. All for a total of 5820 SEK.
But now that I am a full Photoshop + Illustrator + Flash + Acrobat + Fireworks + Dreamweaver licensee, they want 6975 SEK for the underwhelming CS4 upgrade...? Ha! Fat chance. Hey Adobe, call me when the clearance sale starts, I might willing to pick up one of your millions of unsold CS4 upgrades for 1500 SEK. "Might" being the operative word.
Same here. I upgraded to CS3 Web Premium from Studio 8 for $499.
Now to upgrade to CS4 Web Premium they want $599 ?!?
-Kevin
Yeah, I mean... had it been a massive upgrade, it might have warranted this price... but as far as I can tell, Flash is the only application that has changed substantially. Illustrator I barely use, Photoshop - oooh, painting 3D objects, stop the presses! Not.
I think I might skip this one, which is totally unlike me, but robbery is where I draw the line. I'll wait until a special offer for reluctant upgraders comes along, a few months down the line, and if it doesn't, I'll hold off until CS5. Too bad about Flash CS4, but I'd need to buy two upgrades (Mac+PC) and hell will freeze over before I pay 2x6975 SEK (=$2132) for this...
(Yeah, that's right... 6975 SEK isn't $599, it's $1066. The price difference between the US and Europe is mindboggling when it comes to Adobe. No other American goods are THAT much more expensive in Europe, not by a long shot.)
Adobe prices
Besides downright peer-to-peer ripoffs, we all know about those "grey market" vendors who sell software at about 80% off list (we get spam from them constantly). The chances that they get their software legally is about zero. I suppose you could say that's their problem, but in general I steer clear of them because I think as an end user I have to maintain some sort of ethical standards. But I must say that when Adobe charges the moon for its upgrades -- and never puts out free maintenance bugsquash upgrades, but rolls these into the next paid-for upgrade -- it is exceedingly tempting to fall into a kind of Robin Hood mentality and think that it's okay to buy their software on the grey market because the bastards have it coming. After all, here I am confronted with the choice of living with buggy CS3 Dreamweaver, paying nearly four hundred bucks for a legit copy of CS4, or picking it up that way for maybe sixty bucks, which, since I doubt I'll ever need or use any new CS4 features, is itself a pretty steep price to squash some bugs. This, i. m. h. o., is a lousy position for a Dreamweaver user to be put in, and Adobe only gets away with it because they enjoy a virtual monopoly on this particular market. Has Adobe turned into little more than a den of thieves?
Besides downright peer-to-peer ripoffs, we all know about those "grey market" vendors who sell software at about 80% off list (we get spam from them constantly). The chances that they get their software legally is about zero. I suppose you could say that's their problem, but in general I steer clear of them because I think as an end user I have to maintain some sort of ethical standards. But I must say that when Adobe charges the moon for its upgrades -- and never puts out free maintenance bugsquash upgrades, but rolls these into the next paid-for upgrade -- it is exceedingly tempting to fall into a kind of Robin Hood mentality and think that it's okay to buy their software on the grey market because the bastards have it coming. After all, here I am confronted with the choice of living with buggy CS3 Dreamweaver, paying nearly four hundred bucks for a legit copy of CS4, or picking it up that way for maybe sixty bucks, which, since I doubt I'll ever need or use any new CS4 features, is itself a pretty steep price to squash some bugs. This, i. m. h. o., is a lousy position for a Dreamweaver user to be put in, and Adobe only gets away with it because they enjoy a virtual monopoly on this particular market. Has Adobe turned into little more than a den of thieves?
Adobe have never given a good explanation for this. They have never explained either why they charge the Republic of Ireland rate of tax (over 20%) to UK purchasers who order from their website!
It is lack of competition, pure and simple, that has caused this.
I think it's mostly a technology upgrade in the 64-bit sense...
This is what Windows can do in 64-bit...
Vista also has SuperFetch disk caching and maybe that might help with the increase in speed of the computer.
Given that Macs don't have the technology to support 64-bit, I imagine that for some people, it might give a competitive advantage to buy some Vista machines for CS4. Of course, it depends on how sophisticated your application is. If you're application is intense, 8TB of application memory is a pretty big jump from present stuff. They use this kind of power for Mars re-entry simulations and Boeing 787 design and stuff like that.
What are the advantages of 64-bit computing?
In early testing of 64-bit support in Photoshop for Windows®, overall performance gains ranged from 8% to 12%. Those who work with extremely large files may realize noticeably greater gains in performance, in some cases as dramatic as ten times the previous speed. This is because 64-bit applications can address larger amounts of memory and thus result in less file swapping one of the biggest factors that can affect data processing speed.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/photoshop/faq/?promoid=DRHXB
In early testing of 64-bit support in Photoshop for Windows®, overall performance gains ranged from 8% to 12%. Those who work with extremely large files may realize noticeably greater gains in performance, in some cases as dramatic as ten times the previous speed. This is because 64-bit applications can address larger amounts of memory and thus result in less file swapping one of the biggest factors that can affect data processing speed.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/photoshop/faq/?promoid=DRHXB
This is what Windows can do in 64-bit...
...all 64-bit versions of Microsoft operating systems currently impose a 16 TB limit on address space and allow no more than 128 GB of physical memory due to the impracticality of having 16 TB of RAM. Processes created on Windows Vista x64 Edition are allotted 8 TB in virtual memory for user processes and 8 TB for kernel processes to create a virtual memory of 16 TB.
http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/5709
http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/5709
Vista also has SuperFetch disk caching and maybe that might help with the increase in speed of the computer.
Given that Macs don't have the technology to support 64-bit, I imagine that for some people, it might give a competitive advantage to buy some Vista machines for CS4. Of course, it depends on how sophisticated your application is. If you're application is intense, 8TB of application memory is a pretty big jump from present stuff. They use this kind of power for Mars re-entry simulations and Boeing 787 design and stuff like that.
Ok Since adobe bought MM and kill FreeHand, forced all FH user to basically switch to AI they have not implemented any of the superior features FH had compare to AI.
1. Find and replace graphics FH is 1000% better than AI
2. Text control FH better AI sucks
3. Ability to work in mix mode RGB/CMYK
4. Object control FH is aging 1000% better
5. Star and Polygon control
6. Output area printing
7. Halftone/line screen control for individual objects
8. FH Masking implantation was and still light years ahead of AI
9. The mirror tool in FH
The list goes on...I would not pay for CS4 unless it has these feature.
You are absolutely correct. FreeHand was a great program. Have been running it since the first version which was on a floppy. I still use FH8 on my older Macs and in Classic since I find it to be more reliable than FH10. AI is and always has been a piece of you know what. I would imagine that Adobe didn't need to pick up any of FHs great features since they now have a monopoly. Another feature in FH was grouping. You got 4 corner handles which you could drag to resize. When AI groups, every handle is highlighted. Very confusing to say the least.