Thursday, August 31, 2006
Vista
From Durry...
"Crabby" is an awesome description.
Does anyone know where to find this bogdownyourprocessor filter? Google didn't turn anything up. Maybe Adobe is including it in CS3.
A little research tells me that the bogdownyourprocessor filter is an improved version of the filter_that_is_only_used_for_processor_speed_comparisons. The only actual improvement is the smaller name.
BTW, does the CS in CS3 stand for Corporate Suckers? As in "those Corporate Suckers will buy CS3 even if the only improvement over CS2 is the bogdownyourprocessor filter."
"Crabby" is an awesome description.
Does anyone know where to find this bogdownyourprocessor filter? Google didn't turn anything up. Maybe Adobe is including it in CS3.
A little research tells me that the bogdownyourprocessor filter is an improved version of the filter_that_is_only_used_for_processor_speed_comparisons. The only actual improvement is the smaller name.
BTW, does the CS in CS3 stand for Corporate Suckers? As in "those Corporate Suckers will buy CS3 even if the only improvement over CS2 is the bogdownyourprocessor filter."
# posted by Jacob Bird @ 11:14 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
possibly for those Vista useres, but CS3 for Mac users means compatibility with the new Intel processors which means extrememly fast... yeah for me.
But Ben, you would need a Mac with an Intel processor to take advantage of the speed increase. Unless you haven't been telling us some things
The real problem is that (as I predicted about a year ago) software developers are in absolutely no hurry to port software to the Intel Mac platform. Why would they? Macs do Windows now. Just buy the Windows version, find a bootleg of Windowze and run it on your Mac with full Intel speed.
Chris: What software developers? Perhaps they weren't using Xcode at the time the Intel switch was announced?
Many freeware and shareware apps have already been released as universal binaries. (Granted, they were likely already using Xcode)
Maybe it's time for Apple to come out with a competitor to Photoshop and Illustrator. Something along the lines of Aperture that fits most people's need for a graphics app and only costs $299.
Many freeware and shareware apps have already been released as universal binaries. (Granted, they were likely already using Xcode)
Maybe it's time for Apple to come out with a competitor to Photoshop and Illustrator. Something along the lines of Aperture that fits most people's need for a graphics app and only costs $299.
but Aperature is still mediocre at best compared to it's competition. Right now I don't know if it would be possible come out with a software package that could compete with Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign. Even if something good came out it would take a number of years to gain credibility in the industry.
Mac's will continue to be defined by their sleek and stylish design with hands down the most user friendly operating system. It wouldn't have made sense for Adobe to try and rush to release an Intel supported update, especially in the midst of aquiring and integrating Macromedia's software suite into its own. Plus having the Intel friendly version in CS3 will be an even stronger selling point come next spring when it's released.
Plus CS2 runs fine on Intel machines now it just can't take advantage of the extra speed the Intel processor brings, but it's still as fast as running it on a G5.
Plus creating a low price "pro" software program would only create more hacks in the design industry than there already are and Lord knows we don't need that. It's bad enough graphic designers get to call themselves web designers because they can use Dreamweaver or Frontpage to make a website though they have know idea how to write or read html, xhtml and css...
This is Ben J Tipler signing off, back to you guys in Studio D
Mac's will continue to be defined by their sleek and stylish design with hands down the most user friendly operating system. It wouldn't have made sense for Adobe to try and rush to release an Intel supported update, especially in the midst of aquiring and integrating Macromedia's software suite into its own. Plus having the Intel friendly version in CS3 will be an even stronger selling point come next spring when it's released.
Plus CS2 runs fine on Intel machines now it just can't take advantage of the extra speed the Intel processor brings, but it's still as fast as running it on a G5.
Plus creating a low price "pro" software program would only create more hacks in the design industry than there already are and Lord knows we don't need that. It's bad enough graphic designers get to call themselves web designers because they can use Dreamweaver or Frontpage to make a website though they have know idea how to write or read html, xhtml and css...
This is Ben J Tipler signing off, back to you guys in Studio D
The Case for an Apple Photoshop replacement
Photography: Apple's Photoshop Replacement
"Right now I don't know if it would be possible come out with a software package that could compete with Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign. Even if something good came out it would take a number of years to gain credibility in the industry."
Granted that it would take time. Speaking from a graphics ignorant position, don't Photoshop and Illustrator basically do the same thing (one is pixel based, the other vector)? Wouldn't it make more sense to have them both in a single app?
"Plus creating a low price "pro" software program would only create more hacks in the design industry than there already are and Lord knows we don't need that. It's bad enough graphic designers get to call themselves web designers because they can use Dreamweaver or Frontpage to make a website though they have know idea how to write or read html, xhtml and css..."
I was going to write something long here, but then remembered what mid- and low-level gear has done to the pro audio industry. So basically, I agree with you.
Post a Comment
Photography: Apple's Photoshop Replacement
"Right now I don't know if it would be possible come out with a software package that could compete with Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign. Even if something good came out it would take a number of years to gain credibility in the industry."
Granted that it would take time. Speaking from a graphics ignorant position, don't Photoshop and Illustrator basically do the same thing (one is pixel based, the other vector)? Wouldn't it make more sense to have them both in a single app?
"Plus creating a low price "pro" software program would only create more hacks in the design industry than there already are and Lord knows we don't need that. It's bad enough graphic designers get to call themselves web designers because they can use Dreamweaver or Frontpage to make a website though they have know idea how to write or read html, xhtml and css..."
I was going to write something long here, but then remembered what mid- and low-level gear has done to the pro audio industry. So basically, I agree with you.
<< Home
