 | Jun 1 2009 |
LEONO SUPPORT ALERT: Error "Licensing for this product has stopped working" when you launch Acrobat 9 or Adobe Creative Suite 4 products. Nice one Adobe... This costs us one productive day again! So wait a little when you update adobe CS4 automatically. It corrupts the whole install of CS4 ending up reinstalling or fixing things manually. (Version 4) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Oct 14 2008 |
DIMBEKO Too expensive, too unreliable... Is Adobe 'microsofting' again? First - kill competitors, than kill customers with ridiculous prices, buggish software and terrible support. I will spend my money somewhere else this time. (Version 4) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Nov 24 2008 |
DIMBEKO Well, I am taking back, partially. But the price is still too high. (Version 4) | |
 | Sep 26 2008 |
ANGINA MöRKEL Hi exphotoshop But they HAVE reorganized the old scrap lastly!!?? That should have been done many years ago, of course, but now, after many updates (money, money, money ;-) So you don't have to wait for the integrated pizza-topping designer in Photoshop 14 ;-) As always and in every version, the new Photoshop CS4 seems to be a hugh step forwards, although the redesign took them far to long, there are some usefull enhancements now. So lets buy a new Mac for it as usual and let the Apple & Adobe twins get what they like most of you. They deserve it ;-) Buy a new Mac for a new Adobe and a new Adobe for a new Mac (OS), the twins have tricked you this way for so long now, why should you stop it? ;-) Just take it sportly, ping-pong is a nice game. As everybody knows, your work can't be done with 2 or 3 years old computers or apps, thats impossible, your work stinks then, no one will pay you anymore and consequently you will die of hunger and frustration. And that wouldn't be fine, but hey, gladly there are Adobe and Apple to save your life every day. ;-) I think as long as people are willing to pay a lot of money for the minor enhancements, apps will never be "finished", 20 years old or not. And actual America really needs your money, the american politicans have ordered their citizens to pay 700 billion dollars to a now bankrupt bank industrie that nearly ruined their whole country, the representatives want to assure this way that the vermins can continue with their benedictional business as usual. And both Adobe and Apple pay high taxes as everyone knows, so help please America and buy CS4 ;-) Need more reasons to buy CS 4? And thanks for the Nikon Capture NX tip, I will have an eye on it. Sorry for my bad english, I work in the bank business. (Version 4) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Sep 24 2008 |
Alltogether now, a one-two-three-four: money money money - for adobe must be funny - in a dumbhead world tralla la la lallala la... Stop it Adobe, bugfix CS 2 and CS 3 first. Many of your customers (customers = the people were your money comes from) have paid a lot of money for working app-collections twice, for CS 2 and later CS 3, both siutes are still very buggy, so bugfix them - ultimately - don't you feel any shame for your buggy products, BigBoss of Adobe? You've never tried to work with InDesign CS3 on a Mac with OS 10.5, right? All your work with Bugrobat is done by your secretary, right? And NO, I don't want to get new versions by filesharing, I pay for apps that I have in daily use, BUT fix the bugs, I've paid for a working CS 3 suite! You have my money! You like it? Well, then take out the bugs. Think of: my money - your pocket, and consider the future of this relationship. My tip for Photoshoppers: I suggest everyone who wants to do image-optimizing with effectively professionell tools, to take a deeper look into Nikon Capture NX2, - you get far better and really high professionell tools, far better results, far better organized workflows... FOR 200 DOLLARS. In Nikon Capture NX2 there is not the endless series of opening and closing different dialog windows just for the one tasks of color editing, or editing cuves/ greybalance, all needed tools just open organized in one palette. So you don't have to open one dialog, then close it to open the next, then, if needed, go back to the first dialog again, and so one. That is interface design of 1990. The Adobe style in 2008... And now, that's how it looks like in Nikon Capture NX2: all your tools are by the hand, not the antique style of functions scattered in "open & must be closed before continue" one-task-windows, no menues longer than the way from here to rome. ("Oh, look, how many single entries this menu has, this must be a very professionell app". - Well Adobe, then sell to the many stupid graphic designers, - to your convenience they never die off.) In Nikon Capture NX2 at first try out the many possible ways for your color correction tasks, this app is full of professionell tools - and if you've ever used these tools, the former grandmaster Photoshop immediatly appears like Playmobil... Nikon Capture NX2 looks ugly in its version 2.0, but use it for a few hours and you understand what I'm talking about here. (Yes, you have to spent some hours, it is designed in a different way, not following adobes old logic that you know well after many years.) A suite of apps for thousands of dollars, with many many bugs that never get fixed by a irresponsible developer, can't get more than 2 stars! I've tried out Photoshop CS 4 beta yesterday, nothing usefull in there for me, I think I will wait for the pizza-topping designer in CS 14. Or better for an well thought out workflow-orientated interface redesign, as suggested here, in Photoshop version 25 maybe. Meanwhile squeeze the last drop out of this 2D-image-editing app with costly but mostly useless updates, I don't care ...and don't pay anymore. Continue to withhold the few improvements that are possible in an 2D Image app after nearly 20 years of generell deployment in that market, withhold to feed your update circle, - continue with minor improvements for always the next absolutely groundbreaking version - big marketing and big update prices, but I don't care anymore. Best would be: you give Photoshop back to the Knoll brothers, they were ingenious, something you can't replace by a marketing-machine. By the way, regarding the Photoshop CS 4 new features: have you heard about the brand-brand-brandnew app Bodypaint 3D somewhere? Yes? Well, then, - what about an MP3-Editor in Photoshop CS 14, worth maybe another 400 dollar upgrade? Fix the bugs in CS 3 first, I will never buy CS 4 (as a payed bugfix for CS 3, or CS 5 later for CS 4 bugfixes, and so on) until Adobe fixes them. And give Photoshop the long-needed interface UPDATE. | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Sep 24 2008 |
WHITEROCK Wow! Another annual tax. Just a mere $2600. (If you're not upgrading.) They never fixed the obvious bugs in CS2 but moved on to CS3. And now CS4. They don't give updates on CS2, so work around the bugs and save an enormous amount of money. They have an opinion of themselves even more inflated than the price. (Version 4) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Sep 23 2008 |
PHOTEK no 64bit version for Mac, but InDesign CS4 can back save to version 3.... I think I will be recommending to all the design studios I work with to hold on a year and a half for CS5. :) (Version 4) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Sep 23 2008 |
D9 Yes, one has to wonder at this point what CS4 is bringing to the table for Mac users...unless you want to count the bug fixes for CS3!! Not the least bit interested in paying Adobe for marginal products. Staying with CS3 and skipping >> (Version 4) | |
 | Sep 23 2008 |
SPECTRAL7 LOL i still await them to make CS3 faster and not crash so often when using network homes and iron out all the arse ache to system admins and activation reinstall issues. I dream on ! (Version 4) | |
 | Nov 26 2006 |
LUNCHBOXXPIPER Slow normally, but useful......lets just say I am glad the student price for me was 190$ not the normal price. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Sep 24 2006 |
BOBSTER I've heard quite a few nasty things about CS2 being bloatware, so I'm staying with CS until I see a reason to switch. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Mar 28 2006 |
PETER IN JAPAN I want to warn you about GoLive -- it is the most frustrating, least reliable, most crash-prone app I have used since switching to OS X. GoLive CS2 crashes regularly for me several times a day, and has even managed to crash WHILE SAVING A VERY IMPORTANT FILE, which wiped out an entire day's work for me, causing me to redo it all. Bottom line, Adobe does not deserve your money for this application, which they clearly dislike within the company (when you make a bug report, it's interesting to note that it's called GoLive, not Adobe GoLive). Sadly, the only thing to do is go to Dreamweaver...but that's not an option for me since its interface is not something I'm willing to use. My distaste for Adobe is so great because of their crap with CS2 -- from the activation problems to not recognizing an upgrade of Photoshop (stand alone) when coming from the full suite set -- that I would willingly jump ship to just about any other product -- but opps! There are almost no other products anymore, since no company can stand against Photoshop, Illustrator, and so on (not even Macromedia). Bottom line, the actions of Adobe with CS2 (principally GoLive, since I rely on it so much) have robbed me of much of the joy that is my right as a Mac user. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Sep 24 2006 |
BOBSTER How about reverting to Adobe CS? I have had very little problems with GoLive CS... it crashes only once in a very long while. I've heard nasty things about CS2, so I'm sticking with CS. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Oct 31 2005 |
ANONYMOUS One point of criticism on "Bridge"... please bring back the "auto resolve" function to rename files when moving them around. I have so many images named 01.jpg for example, and having to rename every file before moving is tedious work, even using Batch Rename. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Oct 31 2005 |
FLOODGATE Anyone else experienceing these bugs: 1)holding down spacebar to move an image around on the screen, is slow in Photoshop CS2. There is a long delay before the image actually moves when dragging. Could be the Core Image engine, I haven't tested CS1 on Tiger for the same problem. I have a Radeon 9200 AGP card if anyone has the same issue... 2)Photoshop occasionally crashes on launch 3) menus & palettes "behave" differently, especially the transparency-slider in the "layers" palette seems to require some skill til use all of a sudden. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Oct 18 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Bad update. Few new things. Big new price. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Oct 14 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Slow on a fast computer, ie useless. Back to CS 1. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Oct 17 2005 |
DAVID CROW It runs great on my powerbook. faster than CS. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Oct 12 2005 |
DAVID CROW Some of the greatest creative programs on the market, now nicely interlinked. Creative suite 2 is a must for any professional nowadays. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Oct 8 2005 |
ANONYMOUS the features are excellent but it is SO SO SO slow at everything. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Oct 2 2005 |
ANONYMOUS What about all the temp files!!! They never go. So I'll keep very close to CS1 In my country is more than $1,000 for the suite... Let us start looking for an option... (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Sep 23 2005 |
SPAM ON TOAST apps take about twice as long to open as compared to CS1 and the spinning beachball of doom is appearing with a frequency i haven't seen since way back in the days of OSX PB. WTF have they done - forgotten to take out the debug code or something? add to that the fact that there seem to be dozens of interface glitches [misaligned menus, fugly buttons, non-rendering of accented characters etc. etc.] and this really does look like an unfinished product. thank god i didn't wipe CS1 off my drive before installing this creaking lump of bloat! (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Sep 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Overpriced and overated.... A software upgrade to hold and ransom from the user... After being a loyal customer of the Adobe product line for 25 years. I note that their software is now innovation and market share by takeover. They don't listen to anyone but their own policy makers... Dead end Adobe! You are soon to lose me as a customer... This is not the house that John built! -Greg McCambley (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Aug 21 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Adobe Crap Suite 2 is bad. No more, no less. Still using CS 1, faster and more stable. CS 1 worth 4/5 & CS 2 0/5 (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Sep 3 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Amen. It's a shame that some of us are forced to upgrade just to open the new files. Thanks Adobe! (Version 2.0) | |
 | Jul 27 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Great software but c'mon...$900 is too much. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | May 31 2005 |
DIETER MAY I use InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator from CS2. Excellent software. I enjoy working thereby. Thank you Adobe (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Apr 6 2005 |
THANKS ADOBE I guess I do not have the complaints of others. Adobe did stay with us when many, many others left the Mac software scene. For those who utilize Adobe products for business, the price of the software is very reasonable. For people like me who futz with it and enjoy it, it is obviously a bit more steep in warranting the price, so I wait for several revisions before I upgrade. However, this does diminish my respect for Adobe and what they represent as a software corporation--they have done a fine job and are fine company. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 6 2005 |
GREGORY MCCAMBLEY Adobe stayed with us (Mac users) because they would have been dead in the water without us. It was Postscript and Desktop Publishing that held their feet to the Mac fire, Not their good will. Most PC users still used only the keyboard .... why would anybody use a Mouse? .... Postscript...na I just hit print. Postscript became Acrobat and fonts died two deaths (remember Image Club) guess who bought and sold them twice (for a loss) Adobe is full of greedy little short men with pink eyes who have wives that bark! Ruff Ruff Adobe! (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 6 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Twice now, I've purchased Adobe products with VERY LITTLE SUPPORT. Photoshop 7 went to what, 7.1? And did Photoshop 8 (CS) even get updated at all!? Just because Adobe "did stay with us," isn't any kind of excuse to me. I could just as easily say that I've "stuck with" Adobe - purchasing the Web Collection AND the CS Suite v1. And let's be honest, for Photoshop at least, this is a pretty minor upgrade. The $149 upgrade price is ridiculous. Until PS 8 quits working, I flat out refuse to upgrade. If this is some kind of sick plot to kill off the Mac versions - it may work out well. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 5 2005 |
GREGORY MCCAMBLEY I own 4 of the CS products, GoLive, Photoshop, Illustrator, & Acrobat. And had to buy them separately because of the release dates and actual supply in Canada (they fill the US market orders first) and therefore didn't have the opportunity to buy the CS Set. Still the Policy makers have made the upgrade path so narrow and steep, that only a very few can take advantage of it. Their actuarial skill is outstanding. Their product and customer service is ludicrous and fraudulent. Its not the Company it once was, I can remember back to 1985 when they were helpful, confident and credible. Adobe your on a toboggan ride. See you at the bottom. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS come on. adobe worse than microsoft. there are unadresses bugs in CS 1. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
KAREL and as per usual, us and canadian customers who bought cs1.3 with acrobat 7 are eligible for a us$100 rebate if they upgrade, whereas the rest of the world can pay the full price ... i vote we all move to the us, or better still, canada, and claim our rebate - just to stick it up adobe! (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS One thing that needs to be understood my most everyone is that a particular piece of software has very little value other than it's PRECIEVED value. Adobe is banking on the fact that it's users will percieve this to be worth it. Let me give you a quick example. For most people Photoshop 5.5 is more than enough. What is the current value of Photoshop 5.5? Essentually nothing, even by Adobe's overpriced standards. Adobe's reasoning for activation is flawed. It's the "we can't stop the actualy clever pirates, so let's ream the little guy." My point is the "little guy" doesn't really need this. A new Mac Mini is $499. Photoshop is $899. Is PhotoShop worth more than an entire computer? Once upon a time there was a saying you get what you pay for. Alas, like many things, those times are long gone. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 3 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS "A new Mac Mini is $499. Photoshop is $899. Is PhotoShop worth more than an entire computer? Once upon a time there was a saying you get what you pay for. Alas, like many things, those times are long gone." Your reasoning is flawed. If you are a professional who is using Photoshop for professional reasons, Photoshop easily justifies itself. If you cannot locate any features that justify the price of Photoshop, by definition you are not even supposed to be a Photoshop user in the first place, any more than you are supposed to go out and buy a $3000 digital camera like the pros do. What you are is a Photoshop Elements user, a product which costs less than one hundred dollars and will probably do what you need. Because if you truly needed Photoshop, you'd recognize its value. What's wrong with your reasoning is that you assume that the component must cost less than the container, therefore all software must cost less than the hardware it runs on. Professional photographers routinely buy camera equipment that costs more than a Mac mini. Professional photographers routinely buy lenses that cost more than the body they are attached to! Both of these examples show that it is ludicrous for you to draw any conclusion that it is wrong for Photoshop to cost more than a Mac mini. If you really needed Photoshop, you wouldn't buy a Mac mini. You'd buy a G5 tower. Does Photoshop cost more than a properly outfitted G5 tower? No! So your reasoning is completely bogus. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Photoshop is not 899 bro... the whole CS is only 550... 100 dollars cheaper than last time... and it comes with some great additions that a graphic designer like myself really need. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS like internet activation. Wiiiindow$$$$ (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
NONA Why is it the Adobe is the ONLY one that doesn't adhere to Apple's Command-H (hide)? Is Adobe that omnipotent? (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 4 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS because Command + H originated with OSX and many of Adobe's apps were big before OSX came out, therefore already having commands associated with Command + H from the OS9 days. I agree with you that they should change though, because at this point in time it's harder on a user to have to remember how Command + H works just for Adobe than what those commands would now be mapped to. In any case, you can use utilities like Unsanity's Menu Master to overwrite Command + H in those apps anyway. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Photoshop > Preferences > General (Cmd-K). Tick 'Use System Shortcut Keys'. Been there since version 7.0 (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Photoshop > control+command+h = hide (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS No need to use an Unsanity haxie with Photoshop, in the current version (Photoshop CS) you could simply edit the keyboard shortcut right in the program itself. Or you can whine and complain even with the solution there in front of you. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
in our hands are the option to "switch" or not to new Adobe CS... and pay for! i can't believe in that new features can make your productivity go to "new frontier"! i read in forums and in my own experience (modest work) that CS 1.0 have a lot of bugs and they are not solved yet... insist! ...nobody are pushing you to buy CS 2.0. is the best way to show to ADOBE guys our "feed-back". END (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 4 2005 |
NONA I agree with not succumbing to Adobe's "upgraditis" path. Each year you must PAY for their need for you. And why? they hold back a feature or two so its an upgrade and not a free update? No, its for profit and continuality. CS is STILL not native to Mac OS X. Its not a 64bit application. Only photoshop uses a plugin to use the multiprocessor G4 and G5. Yet Adobe bailed on designers by ditchng ATM Deluxe. Display Postscript squabbles? The only catch is if you have to upgrade your hardware to a new G5, you can only get the CS software for it. If you can't get classic running, you have to upgrade. But on a good note, atleasst inDesign is making strides at Quark. Now, for someone to make strides with Gimp vs Blotoshop... (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Paid over $1,000 with purchase of first CS. Felt that it was useless to have a Dual G5 with software that doesn't take advantage of 64bit processing. I work with large, complex files and I was comfortable with Adobe products. There is no pricing for Adobe CS2 Standard. Clicking on the right link takes you right to the Premium link. I think the software is overpriced and will look towards shareware to replace Adobe products. At least make the upgrades more affordable!! (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 4 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Shareware doesn't even begin to cover what the suite can do. So if you are satisfied replacing the suite with shareware, that logically means you were never in the target market in the first place, and it would have been a bad use of money for you to ever buy the Adobe products in the first place. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS you're right, shareware won't cover it. but the GIMP is a pretty good replacement for Photoshop, and it's free. viva opensource. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS GIMP doesn't even come close. Not. even. close. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 5 2005 |
ANONYMOUS GIMP is a pretty good replacement...for Photoshop Elements. If you think it can replace Photoshop for pro CMYK work, you just proved that you really don't know Photoshop. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Not worth the upgrade... As it looks, the only thing Adobe's addressing is their own interests in this CS2 upgrade. In the press releases they don't really address any of the bugs that people are discussing. The only major upgrade is Adobe's activation issue so they can be big brother. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
BRADY J. FREY I gotta say, with all the bugs still floating around in 1.0, I'm pretty disappointed that they jumped ship to 2.0 already, without still answering some of our bug requests. First and foremost, double-click on the illustrator window doesn't minimize to the dock? Not a majory issue -- but when you become used to a system, and then have to tweak your habits because of a little bug = loss time = lost productivity. ...and the adobe forums are filled with many more issues. I love adobe products -- I switched from Quark to InDesign because Quark ignored the users for so long, and is trying to play catch up to it's lost buyers. Don't do the same Adobe. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 3 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Your first few statements already back-up your last statement. As far as I'm concerned, Adobe IS Microsoft....in business and production habits anyway. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Amen! Macromedia's look'n good right now. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Amen 2! And Adobe built its business on Mac users, yet they totally shaft us by producing a "new" version without ever fixing the bugs in the old one. I also agree that the only way to fight back is to stick with CS1, despite the bugs. With such an avid fan base, you'd think Adobe would try to avoid losing it, but it seems like they're begging us to switch. DUMB. VERY, VERY DUMB, Adobe. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
TONY REIDSMA Come on Adobe!! I just freek'n upgraded to CS a few months ago and now you're hitt'n me up for more money?? This Sucks! (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 4 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 4 2005 |
BRADY J. FREY Complete agreement... we just upgraded our WHOLE company 30 days ago. Thanks Adobe, we'll be waiting a few years again. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Adobe released CS a long time ago. Over a year ago, if I recall. IT'S YOU GUYS who waited so long. What's Adobe supposed to do, phone everybody and see if they should wait another six months? And what about the rest of us? If WE upgraded 14 months ago, should we wait another year to get new features just because we have to wait for YOU? It's all relative. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS True, I guess time went by faster than I thought... I guess my frustration is more towards the fact that it's too soon, and there are too many bugs in the current version. Not to mention, I can't afford to upgrade for the coin they're look'n for. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
BRADY J. FREY I agree -- but we waited in our purchase (and I bought it at home much earlier) because we were waiting for the bugs to iron out... which they didn't, as I stated in my above review. I'm just angry they didn't fix what they built before they popped out a new one. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Activation blows. I have been using computers since 1979 and have seen anti piracy methods come and go (the weirdest one involved actual holes on floppy disks). All of them have failed. All of them have proven to be bad business. Those who want to pirate ALWAYS find a way. Piracy protection, only penalizes honest users. Invariably. Adobe, don't get too cocky. Quark is still alive and the Gimp is not that far behind. (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS i didn't realise that CS 2 had activation for Macintosh? I thought it was still only for Windows. here's the current list of Adobe products which require activation: Adobe® Acrobat® 7.0 for Windows® Adobe Photoshop® CS for Windows Photoshop CS may also be part of the Adobe Creative Suite or the Adobe Video Collection Professional version 2.5. Adobe Photoshop CS for Macintosh | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Did you even read any of the press releases? This is the new CS2 we're discussing, not the old product list you've just posted. YES, activation is a part of the new Mac CS2. Activation is not a big deal, as long as it's easy to deactivate as it is with Macromedia (and Adobe says it will be similar). Everybody will soon be using activation, so learn to deal. Quark's activation scheme is much worse than Adobe's, so why do you suggest Adobe should keep worrying about them? Irrelevant in terms of activation. Lastly, the GIMP isn't even close to serious competition for PS; it doesn't even support CMYK. If you think Activation will hurt Adobe, you're sadly mistaken. Doesn't seem to be hurting Microsoft's or anyone else's sales, now does it? (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Well $350 for the "Standard" upgrade (doesn't include Acrobat or GoLive) or you can go $550 for the Premium upgrade. You've got to be kidding me. This even makes some of MS's upgrades look reasonable. Come on Adobe! Are you with us or not? Should we go back to Quark? Egads!! (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 4 2005 |
D9 I agree. The loss of Acrobat is a bummer for me; it should be included, in my opinion. I'll probably pass on this as CS 1.x is working great for me, and I've yet to read about any new 2.0 feature that would greatly enhance my productivity. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Is it me, or does CS2 seem to be made up of relatively minor new features? I guess the upgrade pricing will tell us more... (Version 2.0) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 4 2005 |
ANONYMOUS It's you. Most of the new features seem to be great productivity features for professionals. If they don't appeal to you, you probably aren't running one of those workflows. It's not like they come up with the list at random...somehow what they put in floated to the top of the list, and you have to assume they were requested. Just looking at Photoshop alone, I can name two new features that mean I don't have to buy plug-ins I was planning to buy (noise removal and lens distortion correction). Not having to buy the plug-ins almost pays for the upgrade price already! Definite buy. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Jun 26 2004 |
JOSH FREEMAN We switched to the Creative Suite about 4 months ago and have never looked back. Can't stand working in Quark anymore. It's not perfect (what is?) but it's far closer than anything out there. More and more printers are supporting it, and the PDF output is sensational. We are totally thrilled. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Mar 19 2004 |
CALIøS Adobe in my books falls into that grouping of developers who breathe a rarer air than any lowly user. Gulled by the lack of serious competition, like others of their ilk they mistake exclusivity and dominance of market share, with quality. Photoshop may "be" the "best", but its not really, when you make a relative dollar for dollar comparison with other products. If it was that much better, it'd draw the stuff for you, and give a fair massage to boot. Adobe, just because you have a product that many professionals need and rely upon, does not mean that you can behave badly. Every update you bring out has bugs left over from the last round, and few enough new features or fixes to justify even a portion of the money you charge. Am I being too harsh Adobe? Not, I think, when so many reviewers can't even get their paid-for updaters to work. And not when I can get up to make a cup of coffee in the time it takes Acrobat Pro to boot up. Should we go on to talk about your immediate, responsive and apologetic customer support then? Or would that be merely an exercise in rhetoric? Good paying customers should not have to come to feedback venues cap-in-hand looking for answers to ridiculous questions. I should not have to ask why your expensive product does not install or update on my stock standard Apple machine. All I should have to do is come up with the money to pay for Acrobat. If I want it that badly. The rest of my buying and user experience should occur on good faith, and in accordance with what you as an experienced and wealthy business have offered me for that money. I run my business that way, and if I didn't, I'd go broke. Why should you not be the same? (Version ) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Apr 4 2005 |
HOTMAC Great comment, even your statements belonging to the question "Should we go on to talk about your immediate, responsive and apologetic customer support then?" I can bear out. Thanks for your words. (Version 2.0) | |
 | Feb 28 2004 |
ANONYMOUS Great suite but it is unfinished, unpolished and bloated. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Feb 19 2004 |
PAUL VINCENT anyone know of an issue as follows: PS seems to corrupt files at random eg. open 500MB tiff ifle, adjust levels, random colour bars appear over image (like a magenta or yellow rectangle set to 'overlay'. File is corrupt. If unwittingly placed in ID - ID document becomes very corrupt. Cannot be opened later. Major drama! Oh yeah - and it dson't save in v2! And best of luck with version Q!!! (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Feb 2 2004 |
ZO I've just seen that Indesign CS can't save to Indesign 2. My boss is furious, we can't send our files to a client who use Indesign 202. Quark XPress 6 is a nightmare, Indesign CS limits its users, seems we gonna work with paper and pen if the next upate supress vital functions again. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Jan 27 2004 |
DTP Bla, Bla, Bla and Bla,,,,,! This CS of ADOBE applications is state of ART pack foe anyone in serious graphic and web design! With hands down it dominates the market. The only thing which will complimented is Flash MX and your very own talent! (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Jan 24 2004 |
KENT Indesign CS can't save in Indesign 2 format. Indesign CS can't export to HTML. Photoshop CS can't open money pics. These are bad limitations. What's next Adobe? A new version must improve an old one. (Version ) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Feb 12 2004 |
ANONYMOUS If you want to write HTML, buy a HTML authoring tool. Adobe has conveniently provided GoLiveCS, but by all means feel free to use a tool *suitable* to the job. (Version ) | |
 | Dec 7 2003 |
ANONYMOUS Seems very good, except ugly icons. One thing I don't like at all: Indesign CS can't save ID 2 format. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Nov 18 2003 |
ANONYMOUS Nothing's really new. Please can you make it slower? Ah it's impossible, already done. This suite is unusable if you don't own a G5 or the best G4. Back to the old version. (Version ) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Dec 14 2003 |
ANONYMOUS I have a G4 667 TiBook with 356 MB RAM, but can go to 526+ MB RAM, and a 30 GB HD. Think this is enough for Creative Suite (Version ) | |
 | Dec 14 2003 |
ANONYMOUS Sorry about last post re 667 G4 Tibook. It was a question, not a statement. (Version ) | |
 | Nov 12 2003 |
SCOOTER I have been evaluating The Adobe Creative Suite professional edition for our company (we both train and develop web apps). Version Cue is awesome for anyone who works in teams, no more multiple version running around. All the other apps seem to have been held for this release. These are NEW VERSIONS of all products. What I love about htem is the integration (which is why I have always been a Macromedia guy). This suite of products will have me off Macromedia (except for Flash) for good. They are well designed, well implemented, well worth the money for the upgrade. Adobe wanted to dominate all aspects of design and production? Well they have. If you don't have this suite, you are definitely behind the curve. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Nov 3 2003 |
ANONYMOUS Photoshop CS is amazing in Panther. Top speed. Try it by yourself. Apple rocks, Adobe rules. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Oct 29 2003 |
ANONYMOUS Some have commented that this updgrade is a bit steep. Have you lost your minds? For $749, one can own full versions of Photoshop, Illustrator, GoLove and InDesign (so long as you have any prior version of PS). In the past it cost between $400-700 per package. How can anyone argue with this. I've already placed my order. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Oct 25 2003 |
ANONYMOUS I agree, anyway: Dreamweaver MX bugs bugs bugs Thank God Adobe produces solid apps for OS X, bloated bud rock solid. Macromedia and Quark can't even think about quality. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Sep 30 2003 |
ANONYMOUS In a tight economy they want us to upgrade to some scheme they hatched up, so they can show increased profit margins without giving the user much to get excited about ala Microsoft. No Thanks! We'll leave this one for the gaullible. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Sep 30 2003 |
THEYTHINKIMSTUPID Ahahah pay top $ for a clumsy authentication system, no thank you. Photoshop 6 or 7 and Illustrator 9 or 10 have everything to work. Nothing is really new here, worth 1-3 stars. Just problems to install a payed copy. And you want me to support you? I don't like Windows hassle when I install a pro software. That's why I use a Mac. But maybe Photoshop 7 will not work with OS 10.3 or 10.4 and we will be obliged to upgrade. ??? Adobe = Microsoft ??? (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Sep 29 2003 |
DR.G5 I will go for it. Early to say how it will fly with upcoming new OS but so far it sound's pretty good! Price is little-bit to steep. (Version ) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
|