 | Oct 18 2009 |
DONPERREAULT I upgraded to Acorn 2.1 for$19.95 from a bundle. I can't believe people are whining over $19.95, at $19.95 it is a real bargain considering I paid about 4 bucks for version one. The developer has expense's, $19.95 is cheap! Acorn 2.1 is light years ahead of Acorn 1 with numerous new features. The developer did a superb job of laying out the tools and the new features. I have been using Pixelmator for the past year and have now switched to Acorn 2.1. Please, do yourself a favor and give Acorn 2 a try!
(Version 2.1) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Nov 3 2009 |
PHANTOM_309 I bought version 1 and like it very much. Now here comes version 2 and it drops PPC support. I've got a mortgage to pay too, so adios Acorn.
(Version 2.1) | |
| Sep 21 2009 |
BETATESTER Seems like I'm one of the whingers
I bought a lot of shareware already, and also paid for Acorn. Maybe the app is not sold enough, so the ones who bought it have to pay again now. I can accept apps, which made a major update every 1 or 2 years, for which you have to pay. But I don't think Acorn is one of that kind. This seems like one of the sharewares you have to pay more often, so I prefer to be "out" now.
(Version 2.0.2) | |
| [ 4 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Sep 30 2009 |
BUMBLEB Acorn 1.0 was released like, 2 years ago!
(Version 2.0.3) | |
| Sep 30 2009 |
BETATESTER I bought about 3 weeks before the bundle and it was version 1.5 (I think)
(Version 2.0.3) | |
| Oct 1 2009 |
BUMBLEB Who ever said that an app has to go slowly through lots of minor updates, to be qualified to serve a major update with exciting new features? Personally I think it is welcome. The developer has been har at work, upgrade or don't - and of course Macheist bundles are an incentive to upgrade sooner or later.
(Version 2.0.3) | |
| Oct 16 2009 |
DONPERREAULT The $19.95 upgrade price is a bargain!
(Version 2.1) | |
| Sep 21 2009 |
ANDYROGERS Even if the MacHeist terms were duly noted at the time of purchase, it still leaves a bad smell for many like me who bought the package in April. September now, and Acorn requires another $20 to upgrade to version 2. MacHeist gave the bundled apps a lot of exposure that they never would have received on their own. I'm confident that the sheer volume of sales made up for the reduced price per app. No one forced the developers to participate - they did it because they anticipated making a decent profit. Now this, the appearance, if not an actual fact, of a sneaky grab to capture more dollars from newly registered users of 1.5.x.
(Version 2.0.2) | |
| [ 4 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Sep 21 2009 |
BLLOYD So they owe you free updates in perpetuity? I really don't understand this rationale. If you use Acorn on a daily basis, and paid like $3 as part of the bundle, then a $20 upgrade isn't outrageous 6 months later. You're effectively paying $23 for the "latest and greatest" version of a $50 app. Unless you think you are the person who should have last word on how frequent the updates are. I mean, c'mon, just beause you bought the Mac Heist bundle doesn't mean the developer owes you anything, least among them free upgrades 6 months later.
(Version 2.0.2) | |
| Sep 26 2009 |
HMURCHISON Gus has bills to pay too. I don't mind a paid upgrade if 2.x is worth it. I don't think Gus can pay his mortgage if he cares about what does or doesn't leave a bad taste in your mouth.
(Version 2.0.2) | |
| Sep 29 2009 |
DOTMACX Did you *see* the 2.0 release notes? I don't think Mac OS X 10.5 had as many new features and bug fixes.
(Version 2.0.3) | |
| Oct 16 2009 |
SIGIL I agree with you. I am definitely done with bundles....
(Version 2.1) | |
| Sep 15 2009 |
MPEZ Well Pedro, the update window stated clearly **This is a paid upgrade**. Granted that it is probably not ideal to offer a sparkle update for a paid upgrade. But benefit of the doubt - Gus is one of the nicer developers around, and wouldn't purposefully do this. I'm sure that he will supply you with the 1.5.3 software. As for the MH bundle - you pay for the software as is. Not an endless upgrade path. It was feature complete for that version, very stable, and usable - and still is. The developer probably gets a few dollars for each license. Your couple of dollars gives you access to the software advertised, and support. So don't be such a cheap skate. Sure, if it was buggy and useless you should expect upgrades to fix the problems; but it wasn't - instead it was stable and complete - for that version. Oh, and I got it in the MH bundle as well. Man, I'm so tired of the whingers. Get a life. The developers have gotta eat. They're not driving BMWs. You bought the *software* for a few dollars, not the *developer*.
(Version 2.0) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Sep 15 2009 |
PEDRO FARDILHA Actually, if you notice I posted the link to a screenshot of the update info that i've got and nowhere it says it's a paid update. Maybe you should get your facts straight before making this sort of comments. And regarding you being "so tired of the whingers." I can see on your review history that you aren't quite the most cherished reviewer around here. I do concur that we bought A software not THE developer. But that doesn't mean that I have to accept (and agree) to whatever policy he decides to use on the way that he jumps version numbers. You seem to know the developer so it's actually noble of you to defend him. I, personally, can only speak about this specific attitude and in what I believe it's the MacUpdate spirit I'm giving my feed-back so that future costumers can, at least, be aware that this type of situation might happen again. That being said, of course that I can accept that the lack of proper info on the update window was an innocent mistake so my apologies to the dev if I was harder than the situation deserved. Pedro Fardilha
(Version 2.0) | |
| Sep 15 2009 |
MPEZ Full apology - I did not look at your screenshot. You had it set to download automatically. If this was not set, a warning screen appeared stating it was a paid upgrade. As to the rest of your reply - no, I do not know the developer, unless support emails for problems encountered using the software counts. My opinion was based on the courtesy and availability of the developer in response to my troubles. What most riled me about your 'review' was that there was no review. You had a problem and you chose to deal with it by a post on a website rather than simply sending an email to the developer that: a. would have sorted out your problem b. would have alerted him to an issue with people who have the download set to automatic In turn, your 'review' ends up turning people away from a very good piece of software and essentially stealing money out of the pocket of a guy who has worked very hard to get to this point. And all because you got a little peeved. And instead of talking directly to the developer as the first point of call, you post here! That is the issue.
(Version 2.0) | |
| Sep 15 2009 |
PEDRO FARDILHA I must say that I'm highly disappointed with Acorn upgrade tactics. Having a 1.x valid license I wasn't expecting that a normal update was going to install a version that would simply make my license useless. I should have known that something strange was going to happen since I was already running version version 1.5.3 and the update window told me that there were a new 1.5.3 version ready to install. I think it's easy to understand my surprise when after the update I have a .0 version and if I want to keep using it I would have to pay the upgrade fee as soon as the trial period expires. No warning of any kind, no chance to keep my old and valid 1.x version of the app, nothing! ( http://ficheiros.fardilha.net/Acorn.png ) I have praised this nice app on the past, but in no way I will tolerate this kind of tactics by it's developer. Not only this upgrade process is not correct but also we are talking about someone who sold a really huge number of licenses thru the Macheist bundle deal and decided that instead of properly support those new costumers he would simply jump the version number to a 2.x and make them pay again. I'm not a US citizen, so I don't know if according to US laws this could be considered a scam, but one thing I know: It's not the proper or even decent way to run a business and as so I'm out! I already deleted it from my Mac and I will be searching for decent replacements from developers that respect their clients.
(Version 2.0) | |
| [ 4 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Sep 16 2009 |
MYSTERY TRAMP MacHeist made it perfectly clear, back in April, that the products offered were not full versions and that buyers should not expect easy/cheap/free upgrades. To lash out at the developer just isn't fair. You got the software for something like $4. It was a steal. Enjoy it. | |
| Sep 17 2009 |
Like I explained on another post above, I can live with the "no free upgrade to version 2" option. It was the simple fact that first it upgrade itself to version 2 and only then, after my properly licensed version was gone, that I was told that I would have to pay if I wanted a fully working version again, that really disappointed me. Pedro Fardilha
(Version 2.0.1) | |
| Sep 21 2009 |
MYSTERY TRAMP You can "downgrade" from the backup, can't you?
(Version 2.0.2) | |
 | Oct 15 2009 |
MERRIMAC If you want to go back to the old version, you can download it here (link also posted at the top of this page under "Related Links"): http://flyingmeat.com/download/Acorn-1.5.4.zip
(Version 2.0.3) | |
| Sep 14 2009 |
ANG And another big jump !!! Am i wrong or i will never see the 1.5.4, 1.6.0... ? I'm not happy with this very bad commercial politic. | |
| [ 5 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Sep 14 2009 |
SJK And what exactly is your point that makes you think this software deserves a 1-star rating?
(Version 2.0) | |
| Sep 14 2009 |
MACUPDATE ADMIN The parent post was nothing but a comment and not a review and should not have used the star ratings without explaining in some detail why the software should get a one-star rating. The irresponsible parent post will be deleted shortly.
(Version 2.0) | |
| Sep 14 2009 |
ANG I'm sorry, but the price and the commercial attitude is also important for rating a software. Incredible, the product is the same but our judgement not !!
(Version 2.0) | |
| Sep 14 2009 |
MISHA 1.5.4 was released today, also. See 'Related Links'.
(Version 2.0) | |
| Sep 14 2009 |
TIM27 Either English is not your native language or you are having a lot of trouble trying to put into words what you are saying. I can't understand what you mean by your posts. "Imagine adobe @ $50..." Adobe what? Do you mean Photoshop? Why would Adobe sell any of their products for $50? I can't imagine that. Why do you think this is a bad commercial product? Explain yourself better.
(Version 2.0) | |
| Sep 14 2009 |
MPEZ I've been beta testing this for a month or two. It is close to perfect - stable, fast (an issue I had with the previous version - this one can open large canvasses without skipping a beat on my MBA), with many of the most important functions for an image editor. Gus is one of the most talented developers around. This is only 10.6 because it makes extensive use of blocks and grand central dispatch - and the speed difference is marked. After 14 days he has enabled a new free mode - so whether you choose to buy it or not it will become a stable for those quick editing jobs that applications like imagewell currently fill. It won't replicate every Adobe function - I still use Illustrator for certain jobs; and it is no photoshop 'killer' as such - but for the vast majority of image editing jobs, it is more than capable. Give it a try. (I have no affiliation with the developer, just think that he makes great software.)
(Version 2.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Aug 12 2009 |
MONDELE I have to agree with a number of reviewers who received this as part of a bundle. I didn't think much of it at first, but I'm finding it very useful for annotating screen shots before sending them to clients to document how-to processes. It might be a little expensive for what it is I got it with a bundle but what it does it does well. I like Pixelmator but miss a shapes tool there, so they make a good pair, but then we're talking about more money, and it would be nice to have everything in one tool. Maybe I'll have to reinstall Photoshop Elements and do a comparison.
(Version 1.5.3) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Aug 1 2009 |
DADAMA I really like this application. I received it as part of the MH III bundle and originally thought nothing of it but after trying it I was very impressed. Although I primarily use Aperture and PS, I found this lighter weight program ideal for editing images quickly and efficiently and it has some interesting features such as capturing images from iSight and a great suite of filters. While it may not be the application I use for serious image editing, I find that I use it more and more for quick image editing (resize, crop, etc.) for casual use (posting to blog, email, etc). Finally, it is an application that I recommend to friends and family for image editing over PSE or iPhoto and I would hate to see Acron become the bloatware that these programs have become. Well done Flying Meat!
(Version 1.5.3) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jul 15 2009 |
JDUB800 I got this as part of recent bundle and for a while it has sat there unused - As a PS and PM user, I didn't see much use for this app. Strangely, I tried this today for some very small items and it was quick and useful. If this developed some Automator support, it could find a little niche in my toolbox - maybe. Showing potential, but a little pricey as a standalone...
(Version 1.5.3) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Apr 21 2009 |
PCHARLES67 Before placing a bad review I thought I'd describe my problem. I registered this application as a possible "lighter" alternative to photoshop elements for simple editing and layer work. The problem is that the program on my Dual Core 2.3GHz G5 is incapable of pasting a photo on to a layer and then resize it to fill the work area. Photoshop Elements has the Place function, which this lacks, and can do this task in under a minute of work. Acorn goes in to spinning beach ball mode and never comes out. I really like the looks of this application and registered it based on a few simple tasks, but if it cannot handle a few layers I will need to post another review.
(Version 1.5.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Apr 3 2009 |
MERRIMAC I'm a total non-professional, and I was just looking for some software to do some image editing. I found this app to be a pleasure to use, powerful, and well-designed. I also was able to do what I needed to do for free, as the free trial of this software doesn't appear to have any limitations. (It puts a "Please Purchase" banner across your image while you work, but I can live with that.) The editing work I needed to do required taking an existing image and separating it into many different layers, and then creating duplicates of many of the layers so that I could experiment with changing the colors. Acorn handled all of this powerfully, flawlessly, and intuitively. I also appreciated the ability to easily export various layer combinations into jpeg's via the "web export" function. While I have not tested many other image editing apps, I have used lots of mac software, so I am relatively confident that this app deserves five stars, at least insofar as it meets the needs of users like myself.
(Version 1.5.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jan 4 2009 |
FOOFOORABBIT Seems like a decent image editor. However, it doesn't handle nearly the same amount of image formats as Pixelmator, doesn't have nearly the same amount of features as Pixelmator, applying CoreGraphics filters is an unintuitive copy of Photoshop's way of applying effects. Yet Gus is charging almost the same amount for this image editor as the Pixelmator team is charging for Pixelmator.
(Version 1.5) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Oct 23 2008 |
GANNET I've been looking for a replacement for GraphicConverter for some time now but there's one specific feature I need that I haven't been able to find anywhere else: The ability to easily edit an image's mask in files like PNGs. Can Acorn do this? If not, is there any chance of this feature being added?
(Version 1.2.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jun 24 2008 |
TFINDLAY The problem with a continually escalating price strategy is that at some point people will just stop buying. Then what do you do? You may lose a good portion of your potential customers forever.
(Version 1.2.1) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Jul 2 2008 |
CARLOS85 Agreed. I was going to buy this today thinking that the price was still $40, then I saw the raise to $50 and decided against it. I've tried the demo and while I like the program, it's not worth $50 to me. Oh well.
(Version 1.2.1) | |
| Jul 27 2008 |
LARRYMCJ The extra $10 just stopped me, too. I've been using the trial version for a few days but now I'll uninstall it. It's a nice little app, but not at almost the price of Photoshop Elements and others in that price range. | |
| Jun 20 2008 |
GETSOMESAUCE Wow. It turns out Gus (of FlyingMeat) really does follow his own words. Version 1.0 was $30. Version 1.1 was $40. Now Version 1.2 is $50 (The macupdate price is incorrect as of 08/06/20). At this rate, version 2.0 will be $130. Is it really THAT good of a program? Me thinks not.
(Version 1.2) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Jun 24 2008 |
FMGUS Just a correction to your comment- version 1.0 had an introductory price of $39.95. It was never 30 dollars. Version 1.1 bumped the price (as promised) to $49.95.
(Version 1.2.1) | |
| Jun 25 2008 |
GETSOMESAUCE You're right, I'm wrong.
(Version 1.2.1) | |
| May 23 2008 |
GETSOMESAUCE "People have been saying this for years: If nobody's complaining about the price of your application, then you've got it too low. ... Originally VooDooPad was only $9.95, and right it's 30 dollars, and I, um, just keep on raising the price and nobody's complaining. They keep on buying it. OK, I'll do that." -Gus Mueller, MacVoices [Podcast] #881, May 7th, 2008
(Version 1.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Nov 11 2007 |
MUMUNOL Really, really promising... Simple but powerful interface: maybe the most intelligent under Leopard. I will take some time to discover how strong it can be. I would just complain - as for other *new* graphic applications working with pixels - about the poor options related to importation and exportation formats... I don't know why some many news apps can't open any pdf files at more than 72ppi and why they can't export in the GIF or PNG format without offering any option...
(Version 1.0.3) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
|
Main
