never liked their programs 
Adobe the year 2009's most hacked software
- Thread starter TheMasterOfOrion
- Start date
I can believe that. Interestly enough, the Trek movie seems to be the year's most pirated film.
I get the impression nobody pays for Photoshop.
Good thing to - otherwise it would cost them twice as much given the thing is pain in the arse to support and I've had to wipe a client's system a couple of times becase Adobe CS fucked up (though in this instance it was a legal copy of CS just not a very reliable one).
Which is why I use GIMP.
GIMP here, too. I haven't seen anything about Photoshop that makes it a "must have."
Wow... that is a curious statement.
I've been using Photoshop since the early 90s and have been providing tech support for both independent graphic designers, graphic design houses and magazines for more than a decade now and have never (not once) wiped a client's system because of an Adobe product (or any single application that I can recall either). How does an application take a system to that point of no return?
In the economic climate that I've faced in the last year (with few people able to afford upgrades or extras for their systems) something like that would have increased business for me as I support more than 30 client's systems that have some version of Adobe's professional software on them. Other than moving from PowerPC to Intel based systems (which caused issues with older versions of Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and Acrobat Pro), Adobe products don't generate a lot of phone calls for me.
Of course, the only time I usually get to wipe a client's system is when they are getting ready to sell their old systems... I can't imagine using it as a remedy for software issues.
Robert Maxwell said:
-and-
None of my clients are using a pirated version of Adobe's software (but then again, it is Adobe's software that is helping pay the bills), and I've always owned all the software I use (including multiple copies of Photoshop since the early 90's).Joy To The World said:
I don't make a lot of money, so I've always let my software pay for itself. If I needed software for a job, I found that many places (like Adobe) offer 30 day trials. This is long enough to do the work that pays for the software. If the software doesn't pay for itself, then it must not have been worth it for me.
People who can't afford it don't need it. People who need it, it'll pay for itself. People who want it just to have it complain about the price (even though Photoshop Elements is under hundred dollars).
Of course I doubt I'm one of Adobe's favorite people as I firmly believe in a if it ain't broke, don't fix it policy with software, and discourage upgrades unless their is a compelling reason. And I've told friends at Adobe as much (and they privately agree with me).
But I don't know anyone who uses Adobe's products that doesn't pay. Maybe you guys should reconsider the type of element you are associating with if you see pirating as normal.
I paid for PS & Acrobat. Once I wiped the (2nd) HDD PS was on without deactivating it and Adobe phone support got me a reactivation #.
Same thing over the weekend, but Acrobat had the deactivate option grayed out. So when I reinstalled, I had to go back to the phone support and they got me going.
So the moral is, once in a great while, phone support actually works and having a legal copy is a good thing.
Same thing over the weekend, but Acrobat had the deactivate option grayed out. So when I reinstalled, I had to go back to the phone support and they got me going.
So the moral is, once in a great while, phone support actually works and having a legal copy is a good thing.
becasue it wouldn't run and it wasn't possible to uninstall it and re-install to repair the problem (couldn't even deactivate). He wanted his Adobe to work and it was my job to make it work.
Now given the amount of development stuff that the person put on this machine I will admit it's quite possible that he loaded something on that broke Adobe and it cascaded or that fact it was a Sony Vaio with Toshiba hard disks could of played a role.
But I've never been one to take the wipe/reinstall approach unless I absolutely have to but in this case it was necessary and as I was paid a fixed monthly fee it spending 10 hours rebuilding the computer didn't make me any more money so it wasn't something I was doing to pad my invoice.
What happened when you attempted to recreate the problem on another system?
I assume when you talk about being a pain in the arse to support that you have more than one client using Adobe software. And that finding the root of the issue would be important enough to recreate the issue to find a solution that doesn't require toasting all your client's systems every time an issue with an application arises.
I find it both hard to believe and a little sad that Adobe products work so poorly on Windows. I was under the impression that Adobe considered the Windows platform quite important.
A
Amaris
Guest
Whether one likes Photoshop or not, it is severely overpriced. I use Paintshop Pro X2, and have used PSP since at least v7. $59 is more than fair for the capabilities this software has, and if it were in Adobe's hands, the price would be triple that with no added benefit, just like what they did to Cool Edit Pro 2.
J.
J.
doublegood
Fleet Captain
Hahahahaha....oh, you were serious.
And not meant for everyone... something which seems to be continuously overlooked here.
Well, I think a better question has to be what does Paintshop Pro X2 offer that Photoshop Elements (at nearly the same price) doesn't?
The only people I know who use the full version of Photoshop are those who use it professionally (as in it is an important tool in how they make money). Everyone else I know uses Photoshop Elements because it does everything they need. Professional tools for professional people, hobby tools for those who just like to play around.
Of course if Photoshop Elements were in Adobe's hands, the price would be triple what it is now with no added benefit. Lets hope that never happens.
Whether you use it professionally or not, Photoshop is not worth how much it cost. The reason people pay for it is because they know they can turn right around and charge their customers for having it. The people that use it do so because of style over substance. They know that their clients want someone that uses Photoshop not GIMP or some other program they have never heard of.
People use Photoshop because they have to because it is the industry standard. It is a verb now. No one says photo edit, they say photoshop.
Paintshop Pro X2 is $55. Photoshop Elements is $75 which is a drop of $25 the last time I checked. The whole reason that Adobe came out with Elements is because they know Photoshop is way overpriced.
After the prodding of the folks here a few months back, I just buckled down and used GIMP. Haven't had one single thing that I have not been able to do.
People use Photoshop because they have to because it is the industry standard. It is a verb now. No one says photo edit, they say photoshop.
Paintshop Pro X2 is $55. Photoshop Elements is $75 which is a drop of $25 the last time I checked. The whole reason that Adobe came out with Elements is because they know Photoshop is way overpriced.
After the prodding of the folks here a few months back, I just buckled down and used GIMP. Haven't had one single thing that I have not been able to do.
Fortunately I only had one client who used CS (he'sa laywer, lots of money, smart guy and liked to play with things) and basically all the stuff on his computer meant I that it wasn't possible to duplicate the setup of the system and when you come down the nuts and bolts of, how do you duplicate an error when it comes up with an error when you open the program and then crashes out.
Same when trying to deactivate. It was one of those tihngs where were a google search turns up numerous occurances but not much in the way of actual solutions.
I'd give you more details but it's been 12 months since I've worked hands on with that client's system (2 months+ without problems and 9 months since moved oversears).
A
Amaris
Guest
And not meant for everyone... something which seems to be continuously overlooked here.
No, I agree with you there. Just to make it clear, I don't support piracy either. If you can't afford it, don't get it. There are many alternatives to Photoshop.
Well, I think a better question has to be what does Paintshop Pro X2 offer that Photoshop Elements (at nearly the same price) doesn't?
The only people I know who use the full version of Photoshop are those who use it professionally (as in it is an important tool in how they make money). Everyone else I know uses Photoshop Elements because it does everything they need. Professional tools for professional people, hobby tools for those who just like to play around.
C'mon, now, the rolleyes is unnecessary. Anyhoo, I've used Photoshop Elements, and I much prefer PSP X2 over PSE any day. Probably more personal preference than anything, but the tool layouts are more intuitive with PSP, and for a scant $59 I have a lot of control and flexibility over my images.
Of course if Photoshop Elements were in Adobe's hands, the price would be triple what it is now with no added benefit. Lets hope that never happens.
Well, the reason I mentioned Cool Edit Pro 2 is because I owned that software back when it was being sold, and it was relatively inexpensive. Adobe buys the software, doesn't even change the features, doesn't even change the skin to match Adobe's layout, just tripled the price and started selling it. If you had bought Cool Edit Pro 2 the day before, you paid 1/3 of what you were the next day, and not a thing had changed. It's why I have issues with Adobe, not the least being most of their software is obscenely bloated (on the PC side anyway).
J.
Well, lets make sure that we look at this post in the correct order...
No one has ever asked me if I have Photoshop. And it paid for itself (in my case) back in 1997, and has been a valuable tool for making a living ever since.
No one asks any of my clients if they use Photoshop... why would they? There is nothing special about Photoshop that their clients would need to request. The only question about applications any of my clients get asked is if they are using InDesign or QuarkXPress, and that is for going to press/print and isn't asked by their clients.
But you were asking around a Trek forum about this only a few months ago... how would you know enough about what goes on in professional graphic design circles to make such a statement?
But I've said to many people that if they can't tell the difference between Photoshop and Photoshop Elements, then they really shouldn't be paying the difference. Of course I don't know many people who buy Photoshop by itself any more, most buy the whole creative suite (which was how QuarkXPress lost it's dominant position to InDesign). But they aren't the same, and I know from personal experience in helping people who only had Photoshop Elements (when I go to do something I normally do in Photoshop and it isn't there in Elements).
Lighten up.
I have (and know how to use quite well) InDesign, QuarkXPress, PageMaker and FrameMaker... and yet when I want to throw together a document I turn to Create (an application made by a friend of mine). I also have (and know how to use quite well) Illustrator and CorelDraw... and yet when I want to draw some illustrations I turn to Create (again). I have (and know how to use quite well) GoLive and Dreamweaver (along with a ton of other HTML editors)... and yet when I want to throw together a quick page I turn to Create (again).
If I have to do professional stuff, I'll break out the professional tools... but for most daily stuff I can get along quite well within two applications, Photoshop and Create. For me Photoshop was paid for more than a decade ago, I only upgrade in extreme cases (I'm currently using Photoshop CS because I haven't needed more), and Create was paid for 8 years ago and I get free upgrades for life.
So I don't see any reason why people should just use what they want to use (as those are the tools that are the most useful). But at the same time I find people saying no one needs Photoshop (or any other application for that matter) just because they personally don't need/use it to be rather bizarre.
Software shouldn't be a popularity contest people. Use what works for you and stop worrying about what your next door neighbor is using. These aren't sports teams, these are tools... and not every tool is the right fit for every person.
And don't pirate software and don't do drugs!
Joy To The World said:
Followed by...
The problem is that you don't have any experience in this area, so how would you know?
No one has ever asked me if I have Photoshop. And it paid for itself (in my case) back in 1997, and has been a valuable tool for making a living ever since.
No one asks any of my clients if they use Photoshop... why would they? There is nothing special about Photoshop that their clients would need to request. The only question about applications any of my clients get asked is if they are using InDesign or QuarkXPress, and that is for going to press/print and isn't asked by their clients.
But you were asking around a Trek forum about this only a few months ago... how would you know enough about what goes on in professional graphic design circles to make such a statement?
But I've said to many people that if they can't tell the difference between Photoshop and Photoshop Elements, then they really shouldn't be paying the difference. Of course I don't know many people who buy Photoshop by itself any more, most buy the whole creative suite (which was how QuarkXPress lost it's dominant position to InDesign). But they aren't the same, and I know from personal experience in helping people who only had Photoshop Elements (when I go to do something I normally do in Photoshop and it isn't there in Elements).
________________
Sure it was... you're just taking it WAY too personally.Santa Claus said:
Lighten up.
Personal preferences are a perfectly good reason to use any software. And don't ever let anyone tell you differently.
I have (and know how to use quite well) InDesign, QuarkXPress, PageMaker and FrameMaker... and yet when I want to throw together a document I turn to Create (an application made by a friend of mine). I also have (and know how to use quite well) Illustrator and CorelDraw... and yet when I want to draw some illustrations I turn to Create (again). I have (and know how to use quite well) GoLive and Dreamweaver (along with a ton of other HTML editors)... and yet when I want to throw together a quick page I turn to Create (again).
If I have to do professional stuff, I'll break out the professional tools... but for most daily stuff I can get along quite well within two applications, Photoshop and Create. For me Photoshop was paid for more than a decade ago, I only upgrade in extreme cases (I'm currently using Photoshop CS because I haven't needed more), and Create was paid for 8 years ago and I get free upgrades for life.
________________
So I don't see any reason why people should just use what they want to use (as those are the tools that are the most useful). But at the same time I find people saying no one needs Photoshop (or any other application for that matter) just because they personally don't need/use it to be rather bizarre.
Software shouldn't be a popularity contest people. Use what works for you and stop worrying about what your next door neighbor is using. These aren't sports teams, these are tools... and not every tool is the right fit for every person.
And don't pirate software and don't do drugs!
And don't pirate software and don't do drugs!
Fine. But I refuse to drink my milk.
