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 | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
On 2011-11-17 07:34:35 -0800, Alan Browne
said: On 2011-11-17 09:16 , Savageduck wrote: On 2011-11-17 00:09:45 -0800, N said: On 16/11/2011, Rich wrote: I think this cloud thing is scaring a lot of software companies, believing perhaps that (rightly) people wouldn't pay anywhere near as much for being in a "cloud" as having physical software on their syst em. http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations...tive-cloud-and - adobe-creative-suite-new-choices-for-customers.html?PID=2159997 For customers who prefer to remain on the current licensing model, we will continue to offer our individual point products and Adobe Creative Suite editions as perpetual licenses. With regards to upgrades, we are changing our policy for perpetual license customers. In order to qualify for upgrade pricing when CS6 releases, customers will need to be on the latest version of our software (either CS5 or CS5.5 editions). If our customers are not yet on those versions, we’re offering a 20% discount through December 31, 2011 which will qualify them for upgrade pricing when we release CS6. I wish they'd put Bridge out as a separate product. They do. It is actually "Super Bridge" and it is called Lightroom. Don't agree. One can do their entire editing flow within Lightroom without a separate photo editor. It does 99% of what photographers need to edit and present or print a photo as a photo. Bridge needs a photo editor (any photo editor will do). I agree that Bridge would be a fine standalone product using other editors such as Elements (which has its own "minor Bridge"), The Gimp, and so on. It is time for you to calibrate your hyperbole meter. ;-) While you are correct in stating that Bridge needs a photo editor, and for RAW processing requires the intermediary ACR, all the other features of LR are shared. "Super Bridge" properly describes Lightroom, since it is basically a catalog UI with the added powerful editing ability. A side by side comparison of the two Adobe products, LR3 and Bridge CS5 demonstrate that with the exception of that editing ability and the UI, they are one and the same. ....even to the point of being able to go from LR to any other photo editor. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
Savageduck writes:
"Super Bridge" properly describes Lightroom, since it is basically a catalog UI with the added powerful editing ability. A side by side comparison of the two Adobe products, LR3 and Bridge CS5 demonstrate that with the exception of that editing ability and the UI, they are one and the same. ...even to the point of being able to go from LR to any other photo editor. Does that mean Lightroom is as slow as bridge as a photo browser? -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
Indeed - they canned doing flash for mobile phones.
Crapple helped them out the door unfortunately... "Rich" wrote in message ... I think this cloud thing is scaring a lot of software companies, believing perhaps that (rightly) people wouldn't pay anywhere near as much for being in a "cloud" as having physical software on their system. http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations...ive-cloud-and- adobe-creative-suite-new-choices-for-customers.html?PID=2159997 For customers who prefer to remain on the current licensing model, we will continue to offer our individual point products and Adobe Creative Suite editions as perpetual licenses. With regards to upgrades, we are changing our policy for perpetual license customers. In order to qualify for upgrade pricing when CS6 releases, customers will need to be on the latest version of our software (either CS5 or CS5.5 editions). If our customers are not yet on those versions, we're offering a 20% discount through December 31, 2011 which will qualify them for upgrade pricing when we release CS6. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
On 2011-11-17 09:51:16 -0800, David Dyer-Bennet said:
Savageduck writes: "Super Bridge" properly describes Lightroom, since it is basically a catalog UI with the added powerful editing ability. A side by side comparison of the two Adobe products, LR3 and Bridge CS5 demonstrate that with the exception of that editing ability and the UI, they are one and the same. ...even to the point of being able to go from LR to any other photo editor. Does that mean Lightroom is as slow as bridge as a photo browser? I didn't think that was what we were discussing here. I haven't found either one to be particularly slow on my Macs. I guess that depends on what you are looking for in a "Photo browser". All I can say is before making the upgrade to CS5 and the current generation of Bridge, I avoided using earlier versions, having found them a total PIA. I used LR & LR2 along with Photoshop by-passing Bridge all together. Since upgrading to CS5 I have had little need to use my LR2. After taking a look at LR3 I have less reason to upgrade since Bridge is much improved and does all I need as a path from my image files, RAW or JPEG, sometimes via ACR to CS5. If all I want to do is view a bunch of images I use Preview. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
Savageduck writes:
On 2011-11-17 09:51:16 -0800, David Dyer-Bennet said: Savageduck writes: "Super Bridge" properly describes Lightroom, since it is basically a catalog UI with the added powerful editing ability. A side by side comparison of the two Adobe products, LR3 and Bridge CS5 demonstrate that with the exception of that editing ability and the UI, they are one and the same. ...even to the point of being able to go from LR to any other photo editor. Does that mean Lightroom is as slow as bridge as a photo browser? I didn't think that was what we were discussing here. It wasn't. This is that "topic drift" thing. What was said seemed to imply something that I was wondering about (I've been considering trying Lightroom; though the recent Adobe upgrade policy change has made me much less interested in letting any of my money reach them that I can avoid). I haven't found either one to be particularly slow on my Macs. I guess that depends on what you are looking for in a "Photo browser". Well, I'm currently using Photo Mechanic to sort and tag (and rename, these days) new batches of photos. That deals with piles of raw format images pretty much instantly. Bridge in some earlier version and Thumbs Plus and whatever else I tried were hopelessly slow. All I can say is before making the upgrade to CS5 and the current generation of Bridge, I avoided using earlier versions, having found them a total PIA. Yeah, me too. I do have CS5 now, but am not in the habit of opening Bridge. I used LR & LR2 along with Photoshop by-passing Bridge all together. Since upgrading to CS5 I have had little need to use my LR2. After taking a look at LR3 I have less reason to upgrade since Bridge is much improved and does all I need as a path from my image files, RAW or JPEG, sometimes via ACR to CS5. If all I want to do is view a bunch of images I use Preview. I'm always at least theoretically interested in reducing the number of pieces of software I use. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
On 2011-11-17 11:26:43 -0800, David Dyer-Bennet said:
Savageduck writes: On 2011-11-17 09:51:16 -0800, David Dyer-Bennet said: Savageduck writes: "Super Bridge" properly describes Lightroom, since it is basically a catalog UI with the added powerful editing ability. A side by side comparison of the two Adobe products, LR3 and Bridge CS5 demonstrate that with the exception of that editing ability and the UI, they are one and the same. ...even to the point of being able to go from LR to any other photo editor. Does that mean Lightroom is as slow as bridge as a photo browser? I didn't think that was what we were discussing here. It wasn't. This is that "topic drift" thing. What was said seemed to imply something that I was wondering about (I've been considering trying Lightroom; though the recent Adobe upgrade policy change has made me much less interested in letting any of my money reach them that I can avoid). I haven't found either one to be particularly slow on my Macs. I guess that depends on what you are looking for in a "Photo browser". Well, I'm currently using Photo Mechanic to sort and tag (and rename, these days) new batches of photos. That deals with piles of raw format images pretty much instantly. Bridge in some earlier version and Thumbs Plus and whatever else I tried were hopelessly slow. All I can say is before making the upgrade to CS5 and the current generation of Bridge, I avoided using earlier versions, having found them a total PIA. Yeah, me too. I do have CS5 now, but am not in the habit of opening Bridge. I used LR & LR2 along with Photoshop by-passing Bridge all together. Since upgrading to CS5 I have had little need to use my LR2. After taking a look at LR3 I have less reason to upgrade since Bridge is much improved and does all I need as a path from my image files, RAW or JPEG, sometimes via ACR to CS5. If all I want to do is view a bunch of images I use Preview. I'm always at least theoretically interested in reducing the number of pieces of software I use. Since you own CS5 you might want to explore Bridge CS5 and Mini-Bridge before committing your $$$ to Adobe for LR3. All functions are duplicated, but are a little prettier. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
"PeterN" wrote in message ... On 11/16/2011 6:15 PM, Charles wrote: "Rich" wrote in message ... I think this cloud thing is scaring a lot of software companies, believing perhaps that (rightly) people wouldn't pay anywhere near as much for being in a "cloud" as having physical software on their system. http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations...ive-cloud-and- adobe-creative-suite-new-choices-for-customers.html?PID=2159997 For customers who prefer to remain on the current licensing model, we will continue to offer our individual point products and Adobe Creative Suite editions as perpetual licenses. With regards to upgrades, we are changing our policy for perpetual license customers. In order to qualify for upgrade pricing when CS6 releases, customers will need to be on the latest version of our software (either CS5 or CS5.5 editions). If our customers are not yet on those versions, we’re offering a 20% discount through December 31, 2011 which will qualify them for upgrade pricing when we release CS6. http://performance.morningstar.com/s...ion=USA&t=ADBE They seem to be managing the ugly dip around 2008. I fell behind with Photoshop updates and was sad to see that it would cost me a LOT to catch up. As an individual who uses Photoshop only occasionally to actually earn money, I have to be careful as to how much I spend on updates. Adobe has missed out on some revenue from folks like me. The software is great but their consumer base is multi-tiered. I would never go for Creative Suite, as it is more than I could ever use. Yeah, I know, use "Essentials" but that is not an answer for a serious amateur photograher who also, once in a while, does something at the professional level. I probably will never buy into cloud software for something like Photoshop. For other apps, maybe. I don't see the relationship of the title to the facts presented. Actually, it is one of his better posts. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
On 18/11/2011, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
Indeed - they canned doing flash for mobile phones. Crapple helped them out the door unfortunately... HTML5 makes Flash obsolete. -- N |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
On 11/17/2011 5:48 PM, Charles wrote:
"PeterN" wrote in message ... On 11/16/2011 6:15 PM, Charles wrote: "Rich" wrote in message ... I think this cloud thing is scaring a lot of software companies, believing perhaps that (rightly) people wouldn't pay anywhere near as much for being in a "cloud" as having physical software on their system. http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations...ive-cloud-and- adobe-creative-suite-new-choices-for-customers.html?PID=2159997 For customers who prefer to remain on the current licensing model, we will continue to offer our individual point products and Adobe Creative Suite editions as perpetual licenses. With regards to upgrades, we are changing our policy for perpetual license customers. In order to qualify for upgrade pricing when CS6 releases, customers will need to be on the latest version of our software (either CS5 or CS5.5 editions). If our customers are not yet on those versions, we’re offering a 20% discount through December 31, 2011 which will qualify them for upgrade pricing when we release CS6. http://performance.morningstar.com/s...ion=USA&t=ADBE They seem to be managing the ugly dip around 2008. I fell behind with Photoshop updates and was sad to see that it would cost me a LOT to catch up. As an individual who uses Photoshop only occasionally to actually earn money, I have to be careful as to how much I spend on updates. Adobe has missed out on some revenue from folks like me. The software is great but their consumer base is multi-tiered. I would never go for Creative Suite, as it is more than I could ever use. Yeah, I know, use "Essentials" but that is not an answer for a serious amateur photograher who also, once in a while, does something at the professional level. I probably will never buy into cloud software for something like Photoshop. For other apps, maybe. I don't see the relationship of the title to the facts presented. Actually, it is one of his better posts. He's telling us that Adobe is changing its upgrade policy, and giving advance notice, together with some upgrade discount. that's good. What's not good is the concessionary title. The title is based upon a totally unfounded statement. -- Peter |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe must be hurting for money
On 2011-11-17 13:16 , R. Mark Clayton wrote:
Indeed - they canned doing flash for mobile phones. Crapple helped them out the door unfortunately... Apple just had the wherewithal to point out the facts: ..flash is processing inefficient - wastes battery power. ..flash is superseded by HTML5 Move on. Don't top post. -- gmail originated posts filtered due to spam. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Canon is HURTING!!! | flaming-o | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | May 8th 08 03:56 AM |
Canon is HURTING!!! | Ali | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | May 7th 08 06:23 PM |
Canon is HURTING!!! | Ali | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | May 5th 08 11:37 PM |
Adobe After Effects 7.0 PRO, Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 for Windows XP, and tutorials, Adobe After Effects Plugins Collection (WINMAC), updated 19/Jan/2006 | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 0 | February 2nd 06 06:52 AM |