# Adobe Creative Suite 3



## bbloke (Mar 27, 2007)

Adobe have updated their web pages to carry information about Creative Suite 3.  One of the most significant changes is that CS3 now natively runs on Intel Macs.  Adobe also provide a table comparing the different versions of CS3.

A webcast will take place today (March 27th) at 3:30 EST, and will be shown through the Adobe site.


----------



## Thank The Cheese (Mar 27, 2007)

boy, that is awfully complicated. makes Vista's version system seem far less convoluted by comparison! What is this "Photoshop Extended"? I _really_ don't like tiered systems.

EDIT: thanks for posting this by the way bbloke


----------



## fryke (Mar 27, 2007)

Photoshop Extended has some video stuff, I think. I guess you should go about it this way:

New Buyer vs. Upgrader

If you're a new buyer, look at the suites and choose the one which fits your needs. (If money doesn't matter, get the Master Collection.)

If you're an upgrader, buy the one replacing your current apps. (If money doesn't matter, get the Master Collection.)


----------



## MacFreak (Mar 27, 2007)

Adobe offically killed GoLive CS3???


----------



## doemel (Mar 28, 2007)

Thank The Cheese said:


> boy, that is awfully complicated. makes Vista's version system seem far less convoluted by comparison!



I agree. Is seems that Adobe has graduated from the Microsoft School of Confusion.

On a side not: I am still waiting for those advantages that were promised by Adobe when they introduced their draconically enforced anti piracy activation scheme. They must have been forgotten. Where's the lower prices? Where's the more flexible license schemes?

Working in a company that doesn't have graphics as their core business I find it hard to shell out stupendous amounts of money for 10+ copies of Photoshop and Illustrator when there's never more that 2 of them used concurrently. Mind you, we do have power users which won't stick up with the alternatives that are usually offered when I mention this (Gimp, PS Elements...), but both Photoshop and Illustrator get used rather rarely in our company.

So, Adobe, how about floating licenses??? That would finally be something that would get a lot of people I know to shell out some extra bucks to have all installed copies that "float around" in their business to be legally licensed.

On another side note, the European prices are almost double in some cases. What's that all about? Adobe is not exacly making us want to buy their products with treats like that.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Mar 28, 2007)

MacFreak said:


> Adobe offically killed GoLive CS3???



GoLive was replaced by Dreamweaver about 2 months after the macromedia takeover...


----------



## fryke (Mar 28, 2007)

They said GoLive would maybe live on within a different product. But I guess there's not much sense in that...


----------



## Natobasso (Mar 28, 2007)

More info on CS3 here, but just the big five (Illustrator, Photoshop, InDesign, Dreamweaver and Flash) since the other apps haven't released their final versions yet:

http://www.creativepro.com/story/news/25322.html

I have to say I'm very confused by all the different upgrade and purchase options. Why can't they just sell CS3 and be done with it? Why do we need Professional and other versions?? It all started with Acrobat Professional and Standard: No one knew, not even the most experienced designers, which one to get!


----------



## Natobasso (Mar 28, 2007)

Lt Major Burns said:


> GoLive was replaced by Dreamweaver about 2 months after the macromedia takeover...



GoLive CS2 still exists, though:
http://www.adobe.com/products/golive/index.html

Looks like they just didn't upgrade it to work natively in Universal. There's no need for Adobe to compete with itself unless they decided to make GoLive a kind of Dreamweaver Lite...


----------



## bbloke (Apr 6, 2007)

I did find Adobe's product range a bit on the unnecessarily complicated side, I have to admit.  I'm quite tempted to upgrade, led mainly by InDesign's new features, as I still use InDesign 2 (not to be confused with InDesign from CS2).  

With more and more applications becoming Intel-native, including Office 2008, it will become a particularly lucrative time for software developers... and perhaps particularly expensive for those who upgraded to Intel Macs (OK, no one is necessarily forced to upgrade, I admit).



Thank The Cheese said:


> EDIT: thanks for posting this by the way bbloke


 Thanks for this, and you're welcome.


----------



## icemanjc (Apr 8, 2007)

I think that $2,500 is alot just for that. Also I don't like that there becoming like Microsoft and making so many different packages.


----------



## fryke (Apr 9, 2007)

"just for that"? The master collection gives you quite _everything_ of those pro Adobe apps. I don't see how those 2500$ can be seen as "just for that".


----------



## shrapnell (May 4, 2007)

I heard that CS3 applications cannot be read by CS2. Anyone know if that's true?


----------



## doemel (May 4, 2007)

shrapnell said:


> I heard that CS3 applications cannot be read by CS2. Anyone know if that's true?



If by "applications" you mean "files", I can well imagine. Adobe has done this before (Indesign, anyone?) and will most certainly do it again. Even more so now that they have the print publishing market in their firm grip (quasi monopoly). They want everybody to upgrade to CS3.


----------



## salival (May 4, 2007)

shrapnell said:


> I heard that CS3 applications cannot be read by CS2. Anyone know if that's true?



You can open Photoshop, Illustrator, Fireworks and Dreamweaver files made in the CS3 versions with older versions. However, if you use some feature that is new to CS3 it will be either discarded or will not load properly on the old version.

Flash has a new version of ActionScript(3.0), so documents made using AS 3.0, will not open in Flash 8 because the engine is different. You can still make documents that use AS 2.0 which can be opened in the previous version tho.

It is similar with InDesign CS3, you just export your document in InDesign Interchange format and it will be backwards compatible. As is the case with all the apps, new features that are available only on CS3 will not work on previous versions.


sal


----------



## Natobasso (May 4, 2007)

A discussion on backwards compatibility for InDesign here:
http://indesignsecrets.com/answers-to-some-cs3-eseminar-questions.php

One user says ID CS3 and CS2 are not backwards compatible...


----------



## fryke (May 5, 2007)

All versions of InDesign aren't backwards compatible in the sense that earlier versions can _never_ open files saved by a newer version. It's a pity - and holding back the introduction of newer versions in professional environments. But it's not a "bug" specific to CS3.


----------



## salival (May 5, 2007)

You can save as Interchange format and it will open in previous versions


----------



## Veljo (May 5, 2007)

To change the subject a little I've installed Photoshop CS3 Extended and I absolutely love it on my Intel Mac &#8212; it's super fast, super snappy and feels more complete than CS2. Very happy


----------



## salival (May 5, 2007)

Yes Photoshop CS3(and every CS3 app) is awesome. A funny fact: Photoshop CS3 launches faster than Firefox! Super fast.


----------



## fryke (May 5, 2007)

I'm looking forward to all those benchmark tests comparing Photoshop CS3 on Windows/Mac OS X (on the same machines) and on quad PowerMacs/Mac Pros.


----------



## Ferdinand (May 5, 2007)

salival said:


> Yes Photoshop CS3(and every CS3 app) is awesome. A funny fact: Photoshop CS3 launches faster than Firefox! Super fast.



Firefox launches AWFULLY slow... there's no difference if you use PPC or Intel, it's just plain slow. Even slower than Photoshop Elements, and that "takes a while".
Dunno why though...


----------



## doemel (May 6, 2007)

fryke said:


> I'm looking forward to all those benchmark tests comparing Photoshop CS3 on Windows/Mac OS X (on the same machines) and on quad PowerMacs/Mac Pros.



What I really want to see is speed comparison between Photoshop CS2 and CS3 on a G5 Powermac. Only this will really show how much or little bloat Adobe has actually added to their most popular app... Nevermind all the G5 vs. Intel comparisons, they offer very little real information on how much faster the new version is supposed to be.


----------



## fryke (May 6, 2007)

Yes, but that's simply a different wish. I find both important, but for quite a long time now, intel Macs had to fight "against" the Rosetta-effect (slow-down of emulated apps and increased memory-requirements).

Plus: All those years that Apple used Photoshop-effect-scripts to show how the PowerPC was faster than Pentiums... _Now_ is the time to show that even on the same hardware-platform, the Mac is better than Windows.  I've seen one initial test, where Mac OS X turned out to be better overall in Photoshop CS3, although I don't remember whether XP or Vista was used on the Windows side of things.

From tests with CS3 beta, I've heard that Photoshop CS3 was _slightly_ slower overall than CS2 on PowerPC Macs.


----------



## ApeintheShell (Jun 3, 2007)

Adobe After Effects 7 on a Power Mac G5 with 2GB ram is slow at rendering. If you are running it on a Core Duo you can forget it but there is some increase on the Core 2 Duo in the Macbook Pro. It has a 30 day trial period. Adobe After Effects CS3 Professional on a Macbook Pro Core 2 Duo with 2GB ram is quick at rendering. Both versions struggle with multiple video in a two minute time frame(important to me at least). I also tried the Mac Mini with 2GB ram and it is faster then the Power Mac G5. Weird.
CS 3 has a 2 day trial period.


----------

