If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Roger Blake
wrote: no it definitely isn't a return to that. you obviously don't understand what the cloud means or offers. Yes, it is. I was working in the computer industry back when things were done that way. (Were you?) Conceptually it is the same thing. no, it really isn't, and 'the cloud' isn't any one single thing anyway. much of 'the cloud' these days is peer to peer, with 'the cloud' only used to facilitate a connection between two (or more) devices, with data stored on each device (e.g., dropbox), conceptually very different from how it was done long ago. since devices are always connected, 'the cloud' can alert a user about an event that warrants their attention, such as a server crashing, a moisture sensor detecting a flood or even something simple, such as who won the baseball game that night. 'the cloud' hardware can be a computer on someone's desk, accessible only from within their local network, aka a private cloud, a concept that was unimaginable back then. the differences in technology between then and now are *substantial*, as is the functionality that can be done, with the above just a small sample. nonsense. users have full control of their data and can access it at any time, they know exactly where it's being kept (the cloud service) Utter and complete bilge. It's amazing to me that anyone can even make such an ignorant statement. only because you don't understand what it is and how it works. I understand it completely. It is obvious that you do not. you might think you do, but you definitely do not. |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Mayayana
wrote: Apple is arguably today's AOL. They sell pre-digested computing at steep prices to people who want convenience. what the hell is 'pre-digested computing'? If you have an iPhone it's all backed up by Apple. only if the user enables that. if they don't, then it won't. backups can also be done locally to the user's own pc or mac (doesn't matter which) if the user prefers. backups are *optional*. someone can choose to not to back it up at all, although that's foolish. it's up to each user to decide what best fits their needs, not you or anyone else. android phones back up some stuff (although not all of it) to google. and why exactly are backups a problem anyway? it's much better to have a backup that to not have one. making it easy for that to happen means more users will actually have backups in the event their phone is lost or stolen, or even replaced under warranty, which is a very good thing. it helps to actually know about the products you are trying to bash. They pay a thousand bucks for a phone, but they get a shiny, futuristic gizmo that does 100 things and they don't have to understand *anything*. they understand a lot more than you do. an apple iphone se, a current model, can be purchased new from walmart for as little as $139: https://www.walmart.com/ip/Straight-...32GB-Prepaid-S martphone-Space-Gray/497984946 there are several different models of iphones, and not all of them are $1000. and it's not just apple with expensive phones. plenty of android phones are similarly priced. the new samsung galaxy note 9 starts at $1000 for 128g, with the 512g model at $1249. it's not made by apple nor does it run an apple operating system. the red phone, also android, is $1295 or $1595: http://www.red.com/hydrogen of course, the specs and capabilities of a phone that costs $1000 or more is dramatically higher than a phone that costs under $200. users can choose whatever best fits their needs and spend their money any way they want, whether or not you approve. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | The new (Android) Samsung phone is $1000+. | Probably a good point about Android. I don't know and wasn't saying otherwise. The point was that nospam was arguing about the role of cloud and I was just pointing out that cloud, for the average Apple fan, is something more integral and seemingly benevolent than it is for Windows users. nonsense, and it's often the exact same cloud services. dropbox, for example, is the same on multiple platforms and can sync across all of them. a user can modify a file on a mac and the changes will show up on his windows computer, then later, he can make further changes on his android phone, which sync back to the mac and pc. The iPhone was just an example of how Apple controls everything "from soup to nuts", actually, they don't. and how Apple fans mostly like that. I wasn't talking about phones. you only mentioned iphones, so yes you were. | All Hail Lord Jobs. Who do I make the check out to? | | Do I hear Jealousy?? | You seem to have missed my points entirely. you didn't have any. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Wolf K
wrote: There are Android phones in the same price range that offer the same convenience. [...] There are _cheaper_ Android phones and more expensive ones too. that offer the same, er, convenience. not really. cheaper phones generally do *not* have the same features or convenience as more expensive models, one reason why they're cheaper. whether someone needs all of the features in a higher spec model is their choice. if they do, then a cheaper phone, one which lacks the features they need, won't work particularly well, or at all. And better cameras. not always, and the differences are minor. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 2018-08-31 23:57, nospam wrote:
In article , B00ze wrote: And if you quit then don't forget to first back up all your work locally from that famous "free" cloud storage, or you'll lose it. Never really understood that. that much is clear, nor does the person to whom you're responding. What I meant is that I do not understand what CC has that Dropbox doesn't have. Does it allow multiple people to edit the same graphic at the same time? I guess some graphic shops don't have anything else to protect than graphics, but even then, it kinda smells like Adobe are trying to lock you into their ecosystem - can you access Creative Cloud from Paint Shop Pro? Or from Paint.NET? in fact, you can disconnect from the internet and continue to edit photos, create brochures, etc. it does need to ping adobe every 30-90 days to verify payment, but that's it. All Cloud syncs work that way, unless you enable a feature where this isn't the case, but does CC expose itself via the filesystem, so you can access the stuff from any app? nothing is lost if you stop paying, other than not being able to use the apps you are no longer paying for. however, some apps will still work without payment, but with some features disabled. That's good, at least you can still access the software... numerous non-adobe apps can read adobe's files, so there is no lock-in, or just export them to another format. If I want cloud storage I will want it for all files, e.g. not only for Adobe-edited pictures, so why the hell would I want to use Creative Cloud Storage? because creative cloud apps running on multiple devices and platforms and with multiple users can work seamlessly with adobe's cloud. Yeah, if you can do collaborative stuff, then yes, it is probably useful to some people. For the home user like me tho, CC is just not attractive, nor is renting software unless it's really cheap - per-use price would be better for me, seeing as I use something like Excel 3 times a year (never use PhotoShop, don't have it.) nothing prevents you from using other cloud services, but you may lose some functionality if you do. also, nothing prevents you from using more than one cloud service either, or none at all. Best Regards, -- ! _\|/_ Sylvain / ! (o o) Memberavid-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society oO-( )-Oo "Fascinating." Spock figures out the Energizer bunny. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 2018-09-01 00:23, Mayayana wrote:
"B00ze" wrote | Aren't Adobe sneakier than most and put icons to cloud-executing | functions in their software? Meaning once they stop supporting your | version, you can click all you want on that "super duper cloud-powered | picture enhancer" icon in the toolbar, nothing will happen? I don't understand. As far as I know the software is all running locally in the first place. It just pretends to be cloudy in order to justify rent. So it should still work. But the only rational excuse they had for rental Well, what do I know, they could very well create some complex AI-Type filters that can only run quickly on the company's cloud servers - so that button that works when you're online doesn't work at all otherwise... in the first place was that people would always have the latest at the same price. Now, without having a recent version of Win10, you still pay the same price but don't get the latest. It seems that a price cut in the rental fee would be the least they can do. But I guess they don't think they need to. They've got PS addicts over a barrel. I'm not sure why they are not more flexible, it's certain they make enough money to support multiple OS versions, but you have to admit, it is HARD to get Win10 to stay put - most people WILL be running the latest Win10 whether they want to or not... And defending it forcefully. Neil pretty much says that anyone who doesn't go out now to buy Win10 and rent PS CC is a non-pro loser. They're not just saying they personally find it more economical. Come to think of it, no one did say they find it more economical. And it's unlikely they would. Adobe themselves said the idea in the first place was to figure out a way to charge people who skip versions. Most customers were buying every other version -- skipping every second version. Adobe was under pressure to keep coming out with new, jazzy features that people would buy. But they Oh I don't know; my experience with Adobe software (i.e. Acrobat in its myriad editions, and installing/uninstalling Creative Suites) is that Adobe can't code **** - the stuff breaks as soon as Windows or Office updates, there are many bugs, some never get fixed, the error messages the apps give are totally useless, and the Adobe installers are utter garbage. They don't need new features, the old ones stop working all by themselves... didn't have any big improvements to sell. Graphic editing is a mature product. They already have critical things like layers. Most of the "new features" tend to be dummy functions that are just presets of several editing techniques. Yeah, I kinda figured that. So Adobe increased profits by setting a rent that was slightly cheaper than buying every version but notably more expensive than buying less frequently. I'm sure it's an attempt to break piracy. I wonder if the CC products have been cracked 100% working... Regards, -- ! _\|/_ Sylvain / ! (o o) Memberavid-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society oO-( )-Oo Virus detected, delete Windoze? (Y/n). |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , B00ze
wrote: And if you quit then don't forget to first back up all your work locally from that famous "free" cloud storage, or you'll lose it. Never really understood that. that much is clear, nor does the person to whom you're responding. What I meant is that I do not understand what CC has that Dropbox doesn't have. mainly, integration with other adobe apps and multiple devices. for example, if you edit a photo using lightroom on a phone or tablet, the edits are synced to your desktop and/or laptop, and vice versa, in addition to the photos. dropbox would only sync the photos, not the edit history. Does it allow multiple people to edit the same graphic at the same time? I guess some graphic shops don't have anything else to protect than graphics, but even then, it kinda smells like Adobe are trying to lock you into their ecosystem - can you access Creative Cloud from Paint Shop Pro? Or from Paint.NET? there is no lock-in. the files are normal files, the same as it's always been. all that's changed is how it's paid for. in fact, you can disconnect from the internet and continue to edit photos, create brochures, etc. it does need to ping adobe every 30-90 days to verify payment, but that's it. All Cloud syncs work that way, unless you enable a feature where this isn't the case, i wasn't talking about sync. the apps are installed locally on the hd/ssd and work with files stored locally (or on a server), the same as it's always been. the difference with cc is that it has to ping adobe every so often to verify payment status. previously, payment status was a one-time (and much higher) payment. newer versions of the apps add new features, but that would have happened without the subscription model (and at a slower pace). but does CC expose itself via the filesystem, so you can access the stuff from any app? it works the same way non-cc apps do, working with the very same files. other apps can read and in many cases write the very same formats, the same as before. what's changed are the payment options. If I want cloud storage I will want it for all files, e.g. not only for Adobe-edited pictures, so why the hell would I want to use Creative Cloud Storage? because creative cloud apps running on multiple devices and platforms and with multiple users can work seamlessly with adobe's cloud. Yeah, if you can do collaborative stuff, then yes, it is probably useful to some people. For the home user like me tho, CC is just not attractive, nor is renting software unless it's really cheap - per-use price would be better for me, seeing as I use something like Excel 3 times a year (never use PhotoShop, don't have it.) cc is targeted at pro users, which you say you are not. photoshop elements, the consumer version of photoshop, typically about $50 or so street price and a one-time purchase, is more than enough for casual use. the features it lacks compared to the full photoshop isn't anything most non-pros will miss (or even know what they're for). it's also often bundled with hardware, making it free (assuming you want said hardware). some non-pros may choose the full photoshop and some pros might choose elements, while some might choose something else entirely. nothing is perfect for everyone's needs. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , B00ze
wrote: I'm not sure why they are not more flexible, it's certain they make enough money to support multiple OS versions, a major reason is because the functionality that they want to offer that takes full advantage of modern hardware requires something more recent than win7/8. another reason is that the majority of cc customers no longer use win7/8, so there's very little impact in dropping support for it. meanwhile, photoshop elements 2018 supports as far back as win7 sp1: https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop-elements/system-requirements.html but you have to admit, it is HARD to get Win10 to stay put - most people WILL be running the latest Win10 whether they want to or not... that part is very true. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 2018-09-05 10:49, nospam wrote:
[snip] cc is targeted at pro users, which you say you are not. photoshop elements, the consumer version of photoshop, typically about $50 or so street price and a one-time purchase, is more than enough for casual use. the features it lacks compared to the full photoshop isn't anything most non-pros will miss (or even know what they're for). it's also often bundled with hardware, making it free (assuming you want said hardware). some non-pros may choose the full photoshop and some pros might choose elements, while some might choose something else entirely. nothing is perfect for everyone's needs. Ohhh, there is a home version of PS and it's not rented? Nice, I shall look into that (acquiring some PS skill would be a good thing.) Thanks, Regards, -- ! _\|/_ Sylvain / ! (o o) Memberavid-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society oO-( )-Oo Five out of four people have trouble with fractions. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 2018-09-05 10:49, nospam wrote:
In article , B00ze wrote: I'm not sure why they are not more flexible, it's certain they make enough money to support multiple OS versions, a major reason is because the functionality that they want to offer that takes full advantage of modern hardware requires something more recent than win7/8. You can always code your own. Sure, it becomes simpler to use new Microsoft APIs as they come out, but it's always possible to support older OSes, it just becomes hard to keep everything in sync (and expensive, but Adobe makes lots of money.) another reason is that the majority of cc customers no longer use win7/8, so there's very little impact in dropping support for it. Yeah, I think you are right here. meanwhile, photoshop elements 2018 supports as far back as win7 sp1: https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop-elements/system-requirements.html Yes, I will look into that, it sounds interesting, I need to lean layers lol; I'm a pixel type painter (remember Deluxe Paint or Brilliance (on Amiga,)) always have trouble with layers... but you have to admit, it is HARD to get Win10 to stay put - most people WILL be running the latest Win10 whether they want to or not... that part is very true. Yup, Adobe are not really punishing themselves by dropping Windows 10 "version 1" support. I wonder how good Elements is bug-wise; hopefully it is closer to Acrobat DC than to their previous Acrobat versions which were quite buggy. I find the Reader DC updater does a good job keeping the product updated - it's too bad Adobe still sells various "versions" of Acrobat Pro (e.g. Acrobat 2015, Acrobat 2017, etc,) they should sell only "Acrobat Pro" and that's it, because they need to constantly update it as it keeps breaking when Microsoft changes things... Best Regards, -- ! _\|/_ Sylvain / ! (o o) Memberavid-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society oO-( )-Oo Do bl Sp ce is a v ry saf me hod of driv compr s ion! |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 9/5/2018 10:04 PM, B00ze wrote:
I wonder how good Elements is bug-wise; hopefully it is closer to Acrobat DC than to their previous Acrobat versions which were quite buggy. I find the Reader DC updater does a good job keeping the product updated - it's too bad Adobe still sells various "versions" of Acrobat Pro (e.g. Acrobat 2015, Acrobat 2017, etc,) they should sell only "Acrobat Pro" and that's it, because they need to constantly update it as it keeps breaking when Microsoft changes things... I have to say that as one who has used all versions of Acrobat since it was first introduced, your experience with it doesn't reflect mine. I have never seen Acrobat fail when dealing with valid PDF files. What I suspect is that you have run into the myriad of bogus PDF files that other "pdf creating apps" have made, because no version of Acrobat accepts them as valid and will often crash when trying to open them. There's a good reason for that. Acrobat is used to create and proof documents that are sent to professional PDF devices (offset printers, etc.) that strictly follow the PostScript language (the PDF format is based on PostScript). Bogus PDF documents usually fail on those devices, resulting in significant costs to the users that submit them. As for Elements, it is capable of more than most casual users need. However, there are other apps in the same price range as Elements that have the capabilities of the full version of Photoshop, but with very different user interfaces. -- best regards, Neil |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 06/09/2018 03:04:45, B00ze wrote:
On 2018-09-05 10:49, nospam wrote: In article , B00ze wrote: it's too bad Adobe still sells various "versions" of Acrobat Pro (e.g. Acrobat 2015, Acrobat 2017, etc,) they should sell only "Acrobat Pro" and that's it, because they need to constantly update it as it keeps breaking when Microsoft changes things... Still using Acrobat X Pro (2010) here, it's been through Windows Vista, win 7, win 8/8.1 and now win 10 and it ain't broken once :-) -- mick |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
"Wolf K" wrote
| You can always code your own. | [...] | | Who's "you"? | I think he meant Adobe. I doubt Adobe *really* needs Win10-specific functionality for image editing. Someone recently mentioned DirectX 12 providing the ability to use multiple GPUs. But how many people are using multiple GPUs to edit images? It's an ongoing debate in programming: Backward compatibility vs new features. And wrappers vs "coding your own". Example: Not long ago, Windows provided no way to save a JPG file. More recently, it provided no way to handle PNGs. The inexperienced programmer, depending on built-in, 1-line functionality that might have started in, say, Win8 will say their software that handles PNGs only supports Win8+ and that older versions of Windows are just not "modern" enough to handle it. But someone who wants to support 2000/XP/Vista/7 could do that by either using a 3rd-party library or coding the functionality themselves. Another example is Internet functionality. I know a lot of programmers who think calling IE to get a webpage is Internet programming. They don't know how to use the winsock API to actually call and talk to a server, so their software depends on IE! I like the analogy of cooking. You can make spaghetti sauce by dumping a bottle of Ragu into a pan. Or you can dump the Ragu and add a few of your own touches. Or you can use a can of tomato sauce and add the herbs, vegetables yourself. Or you can do it all from scratch. There are pros and cons to each approach. But the more removed you get with conveinence, the less power and control you have. If you're a Ragu dumper then as soon as you run out of Ragu bottles you have to take spaghetti off of the menu. Windows programming is similar. You can use Windows wrappers to do things with a couple of lines of code, or you can use lower-level methods to do the same thing. Over time, wrappers have become popular and many people don't know how to do things otherwise. That's why so much Windows software is slow and crazy-bloated. It's written by Ragu dumpers. For most things other than games there's no reason support can't continue for older Windows versions. Certainly for Win7, at least, which is more widely used than Win10! Most of what is done in a graphic editor is pure math. Sharpening, lightening, applying filters, resizing, cropping... It's all pure math and has all been possible since Win95. If I understood correctly, B00ze was saying that Adobe have no real excuse for being a Ragu dumper. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
B00ze wrote:
On 2018-09-05 10:49, nospam wrote: In article , B00ze wrote: I'm not sure why they are not more flexible, it's certain they make enough money to support multiple OS versions, a major reason is because the functionality that they want to offer that takes full advantage of modern hardware requires something more recent than win7/8. You can always code your own. Sure, it becomes simpler to use new Microsoft APIs as they come out, but it's always possible to support older OSes, it just becomes hard to keep everything in sync (and expensive, but Adobe makes lots of money.) I don't think you know the half of it. On the one hand, Photoshop was traditionally a high quality software. I never had any real bugs to speak of while using it. (I have two copies on the Mac, one copy acquired with a scanner purchase.) But, they have some strange habits, as developers go. For example, they made their own memory management plugin. That's like writing your own malloc. Now, is that absolutely necessary? Or is that asshattery? You decide. If you were to say "Jesus, I get tired when swimming upstream against the current all the time". Yes, it's true. It takes a lot of energy to move against a flow of water. Instead of taking the easy way, and moving with the water. But that's the history of Photoshop for you. When they visit your ecosystem, they slip on their hip waders, and rewrite the parts where their program "touches" your OS. ******* Another area they go overboard, is in hardware acceleration. For example, back when I got a copy of Photoshop, you could buy a small plugin board with dual 56K DSP processors. And Photoshop plugins would accelerate certain image filters, and they'd run on the 56K processor. They've ported the filters to a number of hardware solutions. If we're on a modern computer, well, what could they mess with ? Oooh, video card! There are programmable shaders there. There's CUDA. There's OpenCL. How can we complicate things ? OK, let's try. That might be a component of the "expense" of supporting multiple OSes. The thing is, Photoshop never seemed to be hobbled by the speed of the image processing. It was the scratch disk and the undo scheme that was "from hell". If you had your undo set to five levels, you might do an operation, then wait *one minute 30 seconds* while your image was paged out to disk, on the off chance you might choose to use the undo button. Then, whether the filter operation took five seconds or six seconds seemed... irrelevant. In modern times, you don't have to do **** like this. It's no longer 1990. Processors are "fast enough". An M.2 drive would make a dandy scratch (2GB/sec, faster than most software can go anyway). We can afford a bit more RAM, enough to do a decent-size picture, plus hold five undos in memory. I don't really need video card acceleration at all - if it wasn't available, or if it wasn't available on Windows 7, I doubt anyone would notice. Not all Photoshop filters are multithreaded. Some are single-threaded (for "quality" reasons). It's not like everything is accelerated in the first place. It's one of those cases where you: 1) Don't want to know what's under the hood. 2) Depending on your hardware setup, you better be a patient individual. I don't do a lot of Photoshop, but Photoshop ran my scanner via the provided plugin that came with the scanner. And that's how I got some exposure to it. And full Photoshop has a macro-recorder, so I could scan a sheet, and after about two minutes, out would come an image which was noise-reduced and ready for the rest of the workflow. All with one click of a button. I guess it's a matter of "really needing it", to appreciate it. It has its own ecosystem. People will sell you training. And so on. Paul |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Mayayana
wrote: I doubt Adobe *really* needs Win10-specific functionality for image editing. for basic image editing (e.g., colour balance, exposure adjustment), that is true. for advanced functionality, that is not true. they didn't cut it off at win10 just for the hell of it. there are features in win10 that adobe wants to use that do not exist in earlier versions, making it impossible to continue to support win7/8 and provide those features. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|