How's the air up there? Getting any nosebleeds yet?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Photoshop for Mac killed?
- Thread starter mark murphy
- Start date
Agreed.
And they wouldn't have released the initial beta(s) as Mac-only...
Anyone who says Aperture is competing with Photoshop has to explain how Lightroom isn't...
--
My Flickr sets:
http://flickr.com/photos/mike_leone/sets/
I find that hard to believe - but if it -was- already in the works - Adobe sure rolled-out the MAC ONLY betas pretty darn fast.
Agreed.
It is fun to watch the video tutorials for both - it becomes hard to tell which program you are seeing demonstrated.
Especially when they both mention how photos don't -have- to be imported into the program's database - even though both apps were guilty of that exact "feature" in earlier versions.
--
My Flickr sets:
http://flickr.com/photos/mike_leone/sets/
Photoshop and "C r e a t iv e S u i c i d e" already working badly in Mac. I have Quad G5 and photoshop has never been working so badly than now, neither in my friend G5 Macs.
Too much watching "beach ball" etc... Also After Effect's no good support...I have Director 8 and flash 5, cant update....
Now, when Adobe has allmost monopoly in DTP I hope someone (e.g apple, Quark) could develop GIMP or other photo tools, that Adobe tyrant won't get too much supremacy...
also who remembers what happend to Premiere vs. Final Cut....
Too much watching "beach ball" etc... Also After Effect's no good support...I have Director 8 and flash 5, cant update....
Now, when Adobe has allmost monopoly in DTP I hope someone (e.g apple, Quark) could develop GIMP or other photo tools, that Adobe tyrant won't get too much supremacy...
also who remembers what happend to Premiere vs. Final Cut....
Mark Smith145430
Veteran Member
Works great on the 27 G5's I have here in the Mac teaching Room, on my G5 at home and most of the other Macs I use at various Photo studios.
The beachball problem is probably bad Ram.
Mark
http://www.photo-utopia.blogspot.com/
DocDAT
Senior Member
That's just too funny on so many levels. Though unintentionally of course. Suffice to say it's probably the biggest load of BS I've read on Dpreview yet.
Karl Jacobs191778
Senior Member
The air is just fine. There is a smoke plume off in the distance from the unwashed masses that ***** about photoshop when they really should be using PhotoElements, but it's nothing to be really concerned about.
The real problem is that 90% of the people here can't help but get their noses in a snit when someone else uses a different tool then they do, so they feel inferior somehow, and have to bash the other tool to feel better.
DonAvebury
Senior Member
Well, the problem is when they see someone else using a superior tool that they can't afford (or understand). That makes them feel inferior, so they lash out.
Karl Jacobs191778
Senior Member
Like all the folks going into the Leica forum and bashing the M8, even though they have never used, touched, or perhaps even seen an M-series camera.
Meryl Arbing
Senior Member
Yes, there is a lot of people throwing around that word 'professional' as if it was some great argument stopper. It isn't. Even if 100% of all graphic arts and photographic professionals used Mac...that is still such a pitifully small number...compared to the number of non-professional photographers in the world that their preferences don't matter.
Think of how many professional photographers used Hasselblads and all of the other medium and large format cameras in the world...do you think their 'professional' use of medium format film cameras made ANY difference to the film companies who have moved to digital? The fact that 100% of professional photographers used medium format film cameras couldn't stop the march of digital because...who REALLY mattered wasn't the professionals but it was the 'mom and pop' amateur snapshooters who (by the millions) stopped buying film and went to digital...and what the 'pros' used was irrelevant.
With only a small percentage of the market, Mac just doesn't have the muscle to impact the marketplace no matter how many 'professionals' use them...there aren't enough professionals to make a difference.
The only reason that you see Macs in Graphics departments today is because YESTERDAY many other graphics and photo editing packages started out on the Mac. PCs were text based. Mac built their entire approach by telling people that they couldn't possibly understand all of the commands of a 'computer' so the Mac didn't use them..it used pictures.
So, the graphics industry started using Macs and was bound to them by Apples proprietary software and hardware. What Apple failed to realize as they drifted off in a drug-induced fugue was that Windows machines caught up to them and passed them. The same software could run on a cheaper and faster platform. PS on Windows is the same as PS on the Mac...but companies could buy 3 PC workstations for every Mac. However, the artsy types still didn't know anything about computers...they were still back in 1970...and all they remembered was the DOS prompt. So they may still be married to Mac through total ignorance not being aware that they can do exactly the same job on Windows machines. But, if they don't know...the rest of the world does and so..Mac is 4% of the market and Windows is 94% of the market.
Think of how many professional photographers used Hasselblads and all of the other medium and large format cameras in the world...do you think their 'professional' use of medium format film cameras made ANY difference to the film companies who have moved to digital? The fact that 100% of professional photographers used medium format film cameras couldn't stop the march of digital because...who REALLY mattered wasn't the professionals but it was the 'mom and pop' amateur snapshooters who (by the millions) stopped buying film and went to digital...and what the 'pros' used was irrelevant.
With only a small percentage of the market, Mac just doesn't have the muscle to impact the marketplace no matter how many 'professionals' use them...there aren't enough professionals to make a difference.
The only reason that you see Macs in Graphics departments today is because YESTERDAY many other graphics and photo editing packages started out on the Mac. PCs were text based. Mac built their entire approach by telling people that they couldn't possibly understand all of the commands of a 'computer' so the Mac didn't use them..it used pictures.
So, the graphics industry started using Macs and was bound to them by Apples proprietary software and hardware. What Apple failed to realize as they drifted off in a drug-induced fugue was that Windows machines caught up to them and passed them. The same software could run on a cheaper and faster platform. PS on Windows is the same as PS on the Mac...but companies could buy 3 PC workstations for every Mac. However, the artsy types still didn't know anything about computers...they were still back in 1970...and all they remembered was the DOS prompt. So they may still be married to Mac through total ignorance not being aware that they can do exactly the same job on Windows machines. But, if they don't know...the rest of the world does and so..Mac is 4% of the market and Windows is 94% of the market.
ScottyNV
Senior Member
is for "New purchases"... not for total market share.. first you need to understand that the typical Mac upgrade cycle is on the order of 5-7 YEARS, much longer than the 15-24 MONTHS for the PC user upgrade cycle.. and that there are a large percentage - perhaps as many as 35-40% of Macs that are 10 or more years old still in daily service...how many 10 year old PC's are still being used at all??
in reality, the Mac 'market share' is closer to 30%, but the quoted statistics choose to ignore these facts.
no, I can't lay a finger on the numbers I am stating, but as a long-time (20+ years) of both systems, they fit with observed reality... and I am unlikely to replace the G4 iBook I am writing this on - 18months old now - for several more years...
Cheers,
Scotty
--
in reality, the Mac 'market share' is closer to 30%, but the quoted statistics choose to ignore these facts.
no, I can't lay a finger on the numbers I am stating, but as a long-time (20+ years) of both systems, they fit with observed reality... and I am unlikely to replace the G4 iBook I am writing this on - 18months old now - for several more years...
Cheers,
Scotty
--
- How deep does the Rabbit Hole go? *
Mark Smith145430
Veteran Member
Eh no not quite, there are a few differences certain ways that it works with core OS X features
Untrue, a Mac Pro costs today $2500 where can a buy an equivalent machine for $800? Don't counter with the self build argument companies just don't do that.
Also for a company the hardware is secondry a Mac costs $2000 and works for 4 years a "artsy' type gets paid $120,000 in the same timeframe.
So "Artsy" types know nothing about computers? Maybe they don't need to?
Or possibly you are ignorant of the difference between them:
Here are a few:
System wide colour management, even in web browsers.
System wide spell check, and dictionary.
Easy access to extended character set like é ü ç ™etc you often see PC users substitute (tm) for ™ and -- for — and write $0.02 instead of 2¢.
Why? because alt c is easier on a Mac to get ç on a PC you have to go (number pad) alt 0199.
Also with the Mac you get Automator actions, this means I can have icons on my desktop that are basically scripts, I can just drop say 1000 images on one of these and it will automatically size for web and attach a sRGB profile then output them to a pre-determined folder.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/automator/
Sure I could write a VB script for the PC, but the Apple method needs no knowledge of programming.
Basically a Mac is just a PC that Runs XP, Linux AND OS X and that is a pretty big strength as personally as a "artsy' type I find Macs easier to use for day to day tasks and you can't put a price on that!
Just my 2¢ (or $0.02 for you PC users)
MarK
--
http://www.digitalcamera.netfirms.com http://www.pbase.com/mark_antony/root
Wayne Larmon
Forum Pro
Can you, or anybody else, corroborate this somehow? Links so somebody else that says the same thing? Or to some reputable market share statistics?
Wayne
Laurentiu Todie
Senior Member
No one disputes the PC's market dominance, but it is irrelevant to the topic of this thread.
Adobe can't dismiss 40% of their customers.
(… and Apple could hire the Gimp team; I love Photoshop but it can use some competition : )
Adobe can't dismiss 40% of their customers.
(… and Apple could hire the Gimp team; I love Photoshop but it can use some competition : )
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum