wow, I wonder if they'll make it slower than CS1, just like they made CS1 slower than the previous version despite the opportunity to optimize for G5s and DPs.
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.
Photoshop CS2 Leak
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Yet another update of photoshop. Well Photoshop is coming like Windows and Office, put some small new features and charge you an premium upgrade price once a year. I hardly see any improvment, beside complete support of RAW file, which they are suppose to do it LONG AGO.
Even in their press release, they was able to list ONLY TWO new main features. Now that's pathetic for an $200 upgrade
Even in their press release, they was able to list ONLY TWO new main features. Now that's pathetic for an $200 upgrade
As someone else mentioned, I hope Adobe works out the bugs with the final release of Tiger before releasing PS CS2. Lately Adobe has been such a slacker of a company on releasing bug fixes/updates. They need to start following the model of Macromedia (with its know problem/solution pages) or they're going to find a huge slip to #2 Macromedia. Illustrator 10 was the biggest bug disaster Adobe has every created, and they never fixed it before releasing CS. That makes me so mad. 
hah i remember when a guy at college told me Photoshop CS was a cheap/home user version of Photoshop 6. what an ass.
Yea I agree with everything said here about CS1 being a little bad. Sure its a good application but it was an expensive upgrade for something that was virtually a rebranding of Photoshop 7.
If user reviews of this are good ill finally upgrade from Photoshop 7.
Yea I agree with everything said here about CS1 being a little bad. Sure its a good application but it was an expensive upgrade for something that was virtually a rebranding of Photoshop 7.
If user reviews of this are good ill finally upgrade from Photoshop 7.
HDRI....weeeeeeee
I read CS2 will support and be able to create HighDynamicRange Images which is HUGE for 3D, especially for the mac which doesnt have the HDRI tools that the other OS's get. I hate lighting scenes in 3d, custom HDRI, radiosity on a new dual core powermac, ati x800 build to order, tirger core image/video....this is going to make life in lightwave much better/easier.
I read CS2 will support and be able to create HighDynamicRange Images which is HUGE for 3D, especially for the mac which doesnt have the HDRI tools that the other OS's get. I hate lighting scenes in 3d, custom HDRI, radiosity on a new dual core powermac, ati x800 build to order, tirger core image/video....this is going to make life in lightwave much better/easier.
Bad Timing
Tiger isn't even out yet and CS2 is ready to be released. It would take Adobe way too long to rewrite and optimize CS for Tiger; we'll just have to wait until CS3 me thinks. Besides, Apple will release something that will be like a Photoshop lite for inclusion with iWork....you'll see.
~Shard~ said:
Tiger isn't even out yet and CS2 is ready to be released. It would take Adobe way too long to rewrite and optimize CS for Tiger; we'll just have to wait until CS3 me thinks. Besides, Apple will release something that will be like a Photoshop lite for inclusion with iWork....you'll see.
If I remember correctly, this version does not support 64 bit, that won't be here until CS3 (PS 10). Does anybody know if it will support more than 2 gigs of ram?
b-randomly said:
You can buy the edu version now and later upgrade(buy) a later full version. I'm going to upgrade from edu Print Collection with PS6 to a full version of CS2. I spoke with Adobe before and they said that the upgrade price would be the same as if I had a full version of PS 6. This might help take the sting out of the high price if you are without any legal version now.
Mike
Daringescape said:
Like what? I would love to upgrade since I'm still running Photoshop under Classic BUT the newer Photoshop has left me seriously UNderwhelmed. Since the only reason to upgrade is to get it running native OSX I've not bothered wasting the money or relearning time that always comes with an upgrade.
So, like what is sweet about the new features???
Daringescape said:
Maybe I don't know enough about Photoshop to get into the big features that are being updated but it seems to me that Photoshop gets updated too often without enough new stuff. Add 2 features, call it a major upgrade, and charge hundreds of dollars for it. I wonder how much better it is than CS?
wdlove said:
This is what I was thinking through reading all of this. Everyone forgets the fact that tiger is seeded out to developers?
Tiger is 'out' in a way folks. They would be retarded not to take advantage of CI considering Apple made the process of adding this feature to your applications a snap. (so says the Apple website)
Never upgraded to CS, but after reading the new features, I'll certainly upgrade to CS2 -- and whatever the GoLive CS2 happens to be, just to maintain compatibility.
Daringescape said:
Seems as of late that any CS is HUGH. Last time I remember CSv1 was big with the "healing brush" now CSv2 is HUGH because it has a better "healing brush". Come now it was bound to happen. I will take it for a test drive before upgrading.
Bummer, no 64-bit memory support. I'll just stick it out with PS7 for hopefully only another year. I hope those turkeys at least offer 64-bit support for AEPro this year.
<]=)
<]=)
CS will be 64-bit when Windows 64-bit is official
Seriously, what do you expect from 64-bit Photoshop? Particularly if you have 4 GiB of RAM or less?
It wouldn't make sense for Adobe to do a Mac-only 64-bit version - they'll probably release 64-bit for Windows and Mac at the same time.
That is - if they decide to do it at all for the Mac. Windows 64-bit is a full port - Apple has a lame 64-bit attempt in 10.4 that doesn't even support graphics or a UI from a 64-bit app.
Photoshop in a terminal window - LOL.
JackAxe said:
Seriously, what do you expect from 64-bit Photoshop? Particularly if you have 4 GiB of RAM or less?
It wouldn't make sense for Adobe to do a Mac-only 64-bit version - they'll probably release 64-bit for Windows and Mac at the same time.
That is - if they decide to do it at all for the Mac. Windows 64-bit is a full port - Apple has a lame 64-bit attempt in 10.4 that doesn't even support graphics or a UI from a 64-bit app.
Photoshop in a terminal window - LOL.
If Adobe won't take advantage of Core Image, someone else will. Simple as that. Someone will do it halfway as good, and if they still don't pay attention someone will do it just as good. And just as good is (unfortunately) already better than Adobe's offerings.
I can see Photoshop becoming just another Premiere if they don't shape up. And I won't miss them.
Imagine editing with Core Image tools: it loads up immediately, no waiting for Thomas Knoll's name to pass by and to load brushes etc.; the tools could implemented like iPhoto or whatever you like; effects are immediate, tools are non-destructive without killing memory resources, layers exist independently, and anybody can do it.
You won't have to learn the program over a course, or a big expensive book, or a private "expert" instructor.
And the choices we'll have. Not only imagine getting a product better than Photoshop at everything, but getting multiple programs better than Photoshop at everything. I haven't even mentioned the best part yet, it's spelled F-R-E-E. Or damn near close to it. Hell, anything can beat ~$600.00!
So don't worry about Photoshop 6, 7, 8, CS, CS2, CS3, PS2, PS3 whatever, if they don't deliver someone else will. Guarenteed.
I can see Photoshop becoming just another Premiere if they don't shape up. And I won't miss them.
Imagine editing with Core Image tools: it loads up immediately, no waiting for Thomas Knoll's name to pass by and to load brushes etc.; the tools could implemented like iPhoto or whatever you like; effects are immediate, tools are non-destructive without killing memory resources, layers exist independently, and anybody can do it.
You won't have to learn the program over a course, or a big expensive book, or a private "expert" instructor.
And the choices we'll have. Not only imagine getting a product better than Photoshop at everything, but getting multiple programs better than Photoshop at everything. I haven't even mentioned the best part yet, it's spelled F-R-E-E. Or damn near close to it. Hell, anything can beat ~$600.00!
So don't worry about Photoshop 6, 7, 8, CS, CS2, CS3, PS2, PS3 whatever, if they don't deliver someone else will. Guarenteed.
This has "marketing release" written all over it. Why doesn't adobe just go to software as a service and stop coming out with minimal upgrades and charging full price year after year.
comeon! where is my illustrator CS2?!
where is InDesign CS2?!
I prefer buying package to a single software $$$
pls~~~~pls release together with ill / InDesign / GoLive....
otherwise who will upgrade?!
Photoshop CS is stable (at least it never Quit itself...)
where is InDesign CS2?!
I prefer buying package to a single software $$$
pls~~~~pls release together with ill / InDesign / GoLive....
otherwise who will upgrade?!
Photoshop CS is stable (at least it never Quit itself...)
Adobe has killed the Google cache
Well... I'm sure others have now noticed... but it is no longer available via Google cache.
Also... if it wasn't Adobe publishing this package I'd be surprised to not have 64-bit implementation. After all, AMD and Intel both now have 64-bit processors available.
So... the only reason Adobe hasn't implemented 64-bit native support is simply because they are a big fat monopoly and have no need to compete.
Well... I'm sure others have now noticed... but it is no longer available via Google cache.
Also... if it wasn't Adobe publishing this package I'd be surprised to not have 64-bit implementation. After all, AMD and Intel both now have 64-bit processors available.
So... the only reason Adobe hasn't implemented 64-bit native support is simply because they are a big fat monopoly and have no need to compete.
it's not that....
So, the reason isn't that 64-bit isn't automatically faster than 32-bit, that 64-bit needs more than 4 GiB of RAM to have an advantage on most applications, that the overwhelming majority of systems aren't 64-bit capable, or that nobody is selling 64-bit operating systems for the few popular desktop chips that do have 64-bit features?
And it isn't because one of the two soon to be released 64-bit desktop operating systems doesn't support graphics or a GUI for 64-bit programs?
DesterWallaboo said:
So, the reason isn't that 64-bit isn't automatically faster than 32-bit, that 64-bit needs more than 4 GiB of RAM to have an advantage on most applications, that the overwhelming majority of systems aren't 64-bit capable, or that nobody is selling 64-bit operating systems for the few popular desktop chips that do have 64-bit features?
And it isn't because one of the two soon to be released 64-bit desktop operating systems doesn't support graphics or a GUI for 64-bit programs?
AidenShaw said:
Actually... you can run 64-bit with less than GB of RAM... not sure where you heard that. What I'd love 64-bit processing for is when I'm working in 16-bit per channel color space... there would be nearly a two-fold increase in performance when doing such.... all plug-ins could gain in performance as well.
DesterWallaboo said:
I said "advantage" - of course you can run a 64-bit OS in 256 MiB or less. The main advantage of a 64-bit CPU is being able to address more than 4 GiB of RAM in a single flat process address space.
DesterWallaboo said:
Of course, AltiVec and SSE have 128-bit registers than can do parallel operations on packed 16-bit data. Don't need a 64-bit CPU for that.
DesterWallaboo said:
Do you have any proof of such an enormous speedup? Note that many applications are significantly constrained by the memory bandwidth. If your bottleneck is memory access, then doing 64-bit integer arithmetic instead of 32-bit won't give you anything close to twice the speed.
You might try to find the March 2005 issue of Dr. Dobbs Journal. It has a benchmarking report comparing a PPC970 in a 32-bit operating system vs a full 64-bit O/S (Linux). In one series of JVM tests, it was slower in 64-bit on every test.
___________________________________
I realize, however, that I took your "64-bit native" comment to mean "64-bit virtual addressing".
Did you really intend "64-bit native" instead to mean recompiling in "32-bit addressing with 64-bit integer arithmetic" mode?
If so, that might be more reasonable - although the issue of using fat binaries or other techniques to make the products work on G4 and G3 systems would have to be addressed.
- Status