7 ms·

Photoshop CS6 beta now available to download

66 points by mrsebastian 15y ago

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
XLcommerce 15y ago
Photoshop is a classic example of bloatware taken to the extreme. I'm running CS5 and routinely run out of RAM with just a few modest files open. It's ridiculous. I'm going back to CS3 as soon as I find some time to upgrade
- kamjam 15y ago
  One of the best feature of CS5 is the content aware fill, I very rarely use Photoshop these days, but that feature made it so so so easy to clean up some images that needed some stuff removed from them without having to resort to a very manual and error prone (for me) task. Totally agree of the bloatware, luckily I now have a really beefy machine!
  - XLcommerce 15y ago
    yeah I'm really starting to realise that I'm using the wrong tool for the job. I only use it for web design, so from my pov all the photo features are bloat.
    - saturn 15y ago
      Too right. All those photo features are just bloating up Photoshop! In fact, not just the photo features. I use it exclusively for writing essays, so all those image functions are just useless. To be fair, though, it does a better job with my novels than Autocad does with my taxes. You can be sure that piece of junk got a 1 star review on the App Store.
      - twelvechairs 15y ago
        Funny. But I don't think you tackle the above poster's point. Photoshop is the defacto standard tool for all kinds of image processing (not just photo-editing), and many (most?) of its day-to-day users actually don't use a significant portion of its features, which just clog up their systems. I for one use photoshop every second day in my line of work, and 98% of what I need it for I could have done in photoshop 5, 10 years ago.
        warpspeed 15y ago
        From my experience too many people are using Photoshop for areas where they should be using Illustrator. In collateral such as logos or signage, vector-based files are infinitely easier to work with, yet I can't tell you how many times I've been given .psd files by designers tasked with such projects.
        kamjam 15y ago
        I'm probably the same as you. I think Photoshop 6 has enough of the features I require (bar the new content aware stuff). I would be great to be able to switch off a whole bunch of the features and filters and god-knows-what-else-it-loads-at-startup stuff and only load them if I actually need them, or be able to switch them off completely with some sort of custom profile. If i need some hardcore editing then I'll go into advanced mode or something.
      - XLcommerce 15y ago
        hehe touché
    - cageface 15y ago
      Fireworks is far, far better for UI design, both for native apps and for web apps. I wished I'd discovered it a long time ago. I hardly ever even launch PS anymore but I use Fireworks all the time.
      - kamjam 15y ago
        That's funny you should say that, I initially started out using Fireworks when I started as an intern as a web developers. This was back in 2000, and designs were all table based, so Fireworks was great for splicing into the required segments. I'd have to agree that Fireworks is probably better suited for most web design needs... It used to be real simple to switch between the 2 packages, guessing it is still the same...
      - bhousel 15y ago
        I'm one of those casual users who maybe uses an image editing program a few times a year. I also found Fireworks to be a much better tool for these tasks. Last week was another of those times when I needed to open a graphic and tweak a logo for the web. But I have a new laptop now, and didn't want to pay for Fireworks or go through the install just for something that I use so rarely. So I decided to try out Inkscape and although it has a klunky X11 interface, I found it does everything that I need. Not bad for free software...
        cageface 15y ago
        Even Fireworks is overkill if you do these kinds of things that rarely but it's certainly a lot cheaper than Photoshop and it's paid for itself several times over in my work.
- davedx 15y ago
  Indeed. I do lots of development using Unity and need Photoshop fairly frequently. Unity runs fine, but when I launch Photoshop it's time for a coffee break and to live with my Mac limping along for the forseeable future. No software is able to cripple my hardware like Photoshop.
- jjcm 15y ago
  Disagree. Photoshop is a professional level tool. When they're building new features, they aren't listening to the common guy who uses 10-20% of the features every once in a while. They're listening to the design professional who has photoshop open 24/7. They guy who lives in photoshop is their customer. That's the person who's willing to drop $1k on a piece of software - the other common guy is just going to download the trial and block activate.adobe.com. If you think photoshop is bloatware, it's because you aren't using all of its features. Photoshop is vast in its depth. Keeping a thousand states of a high res picture in ram takes a lot of memory. Keeping hundreds of composited layers and transforms in ram is equally hungry. You can curtail your ram usage if you want it to use less - the default is set to be fairly greedy. For myself though, I have photoshop set to use up to 20GB of RAM (and I routinely hit that mark) with a dedicated SSD for caching, but that's because I use 80-90% of the features in photoshop. If you're only using 10% of the program, consider switching programs.
  - XLcommerce 15y ago
    Yeah that's a fair enough comment. The truth is that I'm probably using more like 2% of the program. I think for someone like me the perfect balance of features/performance was at about cs2/cs3 maybe even cs1, I cant remember. So I most likely will be downgrading.
    - Terretta 15y ago
      Check out Pixelmator or Acorn?
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
sgdesign 15y ago
Nice list of new features here: http://bjango.com/articles/photoshopcs6/ http://bjango.com/articles/photoshopcs6/ Seems they addressed a lot of criticism, and improved the UI for web designers in particular.
duck 15y ago
Not related to CS6... but has anyone been successful using Photoshop with Linux? I've tried getting it to run through wine before, but never with any luck.
- lbotos 15y ago
  I never had any luck getting it to work on Linux :( Honestly, If They mac CS for Linux I'd consider leaving the Mac "ecosystem".
  - techtalsky 15y ago
    It's hard to imagine it being worth the cost proposition for them to support several flavors of Lunux plus all of the hardware driver support issues that would crop up. It would cost them a tremendous amount in development, upkeep, and support. I'm sure there's a market for it... just not big enough to be worth it.
- epikur 15y ago
  Here's an answer to that from a couple hours ago. https://twitter.com/#!/dhowe/status/182691163936006146 https://twitter.com/#!/dhowe/status/182691163936006146 David Howe - ‏ @dhowe - Director of Photoshop Engineering @ColinHarrington We have looked at Wine on & off, the last time a few years ago. Not usually a high-enough priority given other demands. 12:52 AM - 22 Mar 12
- adrahon 15y ago
  I've found CS2 to work with Wine. Wasn't there a story of Google contributing code to Wine to make Photoshop work? CS5 is listed as Gold on http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=17 http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application... I use The Gimp anyway (I know, I know).
  - danieldk 15y ago
    Actually, browsing that entry paints a bleaker picture. Of the five most recent testing reports, two are gold, one silver, one bronze, one garbage. According to the bronze report: The text tool causes the entire application to freeze (even with atmlib installed). The paintbrush works only very intermittently. Moving and docking panels was buggy, and the bluish docking indicators instead rendered as black rectangles making it impossible to see. and: What was not tested: Vector manipulations, filters, adjustment layers. It's fine for playing with Photoshop on Linux a bit, but not something you'd want to rely on for your business. I guess a virtual machine with Windows is still the most viable solution.
lbotos 15y ago
I'm downloading the beta now but a question for any Creative Suite users, have you had any luck getting CS apps to work when installed anywhere else but /applications on Mac? I have multiple users on this mac and only want CS to be usable for one user. I've moved the apps into ~/applications but updates break. :/ Also, Is it just me or do any other Mac users get infuriated with their folder/app structure?
- axbx 15y ago
  > Also, Is it just me or do any other Mac users get infuriated with their folder/app structure? Adobe's complete disrespect for your file system is legendary. And to make the experience even worse, if you move the 7 useless folders in say /Applications into something like /Applications/Adobe (that you never use anyway), their software updater breaks all over the place.
  - uxp 15y ago
    It's a hack, but if you have XCode installed, you can outright hide the directories. /usr/bin/SetFile -a V /Applications/Adobe\ Foo
natesm 15y ago
The layer stack system is getting really tired. Here's what I'd like to see: - Node-based layer system, like Quartz Composer and Max/MSP. Right now, any complex nesting of layer styles has to be done via Smart Objects, which is a terrible hack that has you saving, seeing what the effect on the final image is, then going back and making more changes, repeat. - It's 2012. There should not be destructive filters anymore. All filters should just be another node in this layout. If you'd like to apply them, you should be able to right click a node and merge everything that feeds into it. Brushes should also be usable as layers. Composite everything. - Where's this layer system going to go? Obviously, it will go on screen, but how about an iPad app that pairs with Photoshop for displaying and altering it? They already have something sort of like this for tools. - Photoshop badly needs usable variables of some sort. I'm tired of jumping around 5 different places because I decided I want to change a color. - Going with the last one, documents should be able to contain multiple images, like Illustrator does. This would be a great addition for icon design, since you could (easily, without ugly hacks) have all of your sizes in the same document. Combine that with variables, and... - Finally, stop the sucky non-native UI already. Stop replacing perfectly good Cocoa widgets with terrible Air ones. Adding fancy new features is nice and stuff, but the fundamental UI of this application is getting really dated.
- terhechte 15y ago
  I've been waiting for variables for years, so sad it's still not there. Not only for colors, but also for values like shadow width, etc.
- gramsey 15y ago
  Definitely agree with the non-native UI point. I've been using Photoshop for years on my Macbooks, and the interface has always had a clunky, slow, unnatural, and Flash-era feel to it. I wonder what the reasoning behind using this terrible UI vs Cocoa is?
  - illicium 15y ago
    Portability. It would be very inconvenient to maintain two completely separate UI codebases.
cageface 15y ago
I hope they're devoting some resources to Fireworks. For web & mobile app graphics I find it far more effective than Photoshop but there are still a lot of rough edges to smooth out.
tomkin 15y ago
I think this is going to be the Photoshop where people seriously start considering a web-based alternative. Not because CS6 will be poor software, but because I think the division among users who use Photoshop for photo editing/professional photography/restoration/stationary/brochure design and those who use it for designing web sites and applications is getting greater. The latter needing less of the options available in Photoshop today, let alone CS6. I say this with over 10 years of experience as a designer/developer – Photoshop needs a Basecamp simplicity-inspired derivative. I think as we move to more institutional, common & predictable UI (if we do), we'll find that we're doing very simple tasks and that those tasks can be taken from Photoshop and automated for the purpose of web/app design and execution. I know there are a few alternatives to Photoshop already, but of all the ones I've seen (yes, even Pixelmator) none of them really go for just the web industry. I think the market for such a tool (hopefully web-based) would be pretty great at this point – and given the audience – using state-of-the-art browser API wouldn't be much of an issue. Long ago, Adobe had this product called "Photoshop Server" or something similar. I believe it was based off of Macromedia's Generator (which generated server-side Flash content). The concept was neat - place variables within a PSD, upload it and allow the server to render out based on what you wanted to show. The problem with this, of course, was that it was proprietary, heavy, expensive and overall pretty crappy. It would be really interesting to see someone create a web-based web design/development application that interacted with some OSS library that most hosting companies would allow (like gd, ning, etc), read .json and interpret data within the image. Probably a bad idea, but how big would a .json-based image be compared to the average jpg? Pretty big, I'll bet. But I wonder with gzip compression how manageable could it be? Would be really cool to define information (text inside of the image, accessibility, SEO capabilities) within a .json-based image. No license required and it would be readable by any human or software. { "dimensions": { "width": 3, "height": 3 }, "data": [ ["rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)"], ["rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)"], ["rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)"] ] } Yep. That would be huge. I suppose that is a massive digression of the topic but this would be my ideal image format, outside of svg/canvas of course.
- batista 15y ago
  I think this is going to be the Photoshop where people seriously start considering a web-based alternative. Not because CS6 will be poor software, but because I think the division among users who use Photoshop for photo editing/professional photography/restoration/stationary/brochure design and those who use it for designing web sites and applications is getting greater. The latter needing less of the options available in Photoshop today, let alone CS6. Photoshop is used by creative professionals first and foremost. It's a $600+ software package. (The people using Photoshop that don't need much of it's power are mostly those that use a pirated copy for some basic home use). That said, there is Photoshop Elements already, a cut down version. And there is a web version made by Adobe too. That said, web editors: sucked, and still suck. For some very basic stuff ok. But try even uploading your last 100 12mo pictures you took with your compact camera. Even uploading and editing one by one, it will take ages, usually taking down the browser at some point.
speednoise 15y ago
Great overview of what's new from Marc Edwards http://bjango.com/articles/photoshopcs6/ http://bjango.com/articles/photoshopcs6/
dutchbrit 15y ago
I get an Access Denied when trying to download the beta..
mvkel 15y ago
I'm going to try Pixelmator again. There's absolutely no reason why this app should need an installer.
- jjcm 15y ago
  The built in GPU acceleration depends on quite a few libraries. Not only that, but the interface is entirely custom (based on air). Photoshop isn't some little stand alone app. It's a 2GB behemoth. Why wouldn't it have an installer?
  - mvkel 15y ago
    My point was more big-picture. The app shouldn't have an entirely custom Air-based UI when there are great Cocoa libraries available. Hell, even a hybrid with some Cocoa would be better (ala Aperture). It _should_ be a stand alone app at this point. The argument about "people wouldn't want to transfer to the new UI" is conjecture. Film pros have been switching to new versions of Final Cut Pro without complaint.
cynix 15y ago
Still can't install on a case-sensitive file system. Seriously Adobe, how hard is it to fix your Makefiles?
snorkel 15y ago
Download for free or the usual first-born list price?

66 points by mrsebastian 15y ago

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

Photoshop is a classic example of bloatware taken to the extreme. I'm running CS5 and routinely run out of RAM with just a few modest files open. It's ridiculous. I'm going back to CS3 as soon as I find some time to upgrade

kamjam 15y ago
One of the best feature of CS5 is the content aware fill, I very rarely use Photoshop these days, but that feature made it so so so easy to clean up some images that needed some stuff removed from them without having to resort to a very manual and error prone (for me) task. Totally agree of the bloatware, luckily I now have a really beefy machine!
- XLcommerce 15y ago
  yeah I'm really starting to realise that I'm using the wrong tool for the job. I only use it for web design, so from my pov all the photo features are bloat.
  - saturn 15y ago
    Too right. All those photo features are just bloating up Photoshop! In fact, not just the photo features. I use it exclusively for writing essays, so all those image functions are just useless. To be fair, though, it does a better job with my novels than Autocad does with my taxes. You can be sure that piece of junk got a 1 star review on the App Store.
    - twelvechairs 15y ago
      Funny. But I don't think you tackle the above poster's point. Photoshop is the defacto standard tool for all kinds of image processing (not just photo-editing), and many (most?) of its day-to-day users actually don't use a significant portion of its features, which just clog up their systems. I for one use photoshop every second day in my line of work, and 98% of what I need it for I could have done in photoshop 5, 10 years ago.
      - warpspeed 15y ago
        From my experience too many people are using Photoshop for areas where they should be using Illustrator. In collateral such as logos or signage, vector-based files are infinitely easier to work with, yet I can't tell you how many times I've been given .psd files by designers tasked with such projects.
      - kamjam 15y ago
        I'm probably the same as you. I think Photoshop 6 has enough of the features I require (bar the new content aware stuff). I would be great to be able to switch off a whole bunch of the features and filters and god-knows-what-else-it-loads-at-startup stuff and only load them if I actually need them, or be able to switch them off completely with some sort of custom profile. If i need some hardcore editing then I'll go into advanced mode or something.
    - XLcommerce 15y ago
      hehe touché
  - cageface 15y ago
    Fireworks is far, far better for UI design, both for native apps and for web apps. I wished I'd discovered it a long time ago. I hardly ever even launch PS anymore but I use Fireworks all the time.
    - kamjam 15y ago
      That's funny you should say that, I initially started out using Fireworks when I started as an intern as a web developers. This was back in 2000, and designs were all table based, so Fireworks was great for splicing into the required segments. I'd have to agree that Fireworks is probably better suited for most web design needs... It used to be real simple to switch between the 2 packages, guessing it is still the same...
    - bhousel 15y ago
      I'm one of those casual users who maybe uses an image editing program a few times a year. I also found Fireworks to be a much better tool for these tasks. Last week was another of those times when I needed to open a graphic and tweak a logo for the web. But I have a new laptop now, and didn't want to pay for Fireworks or go through the install just for something that I use so rarely. So I decided to try out Inkscape and although it has a klunky X11 interface, I found it does everything that I need. Not bad for free software...
      - cageface 15y ago
        Even Fireworks is overkill if you do these kinds of things that rarely but it's certainly a lot cheaper than Photoshop and it's paid for itself several times over in my work.
davedx 15y ago
Indeed. I do lots of development using Unity and need Photoshop fairly frequently. Unity runs fine, but when I launch Photoshop it's time for a coffee break and to live with my Mac limping along for the forseeable future. No software is able to cripple my hardware like Photoshop.
jjcm 15y ago
Disagree. Photoshop is a professional level tool. When they're building new features, they aren't listening to the common guy who uses 10-20% of the features every once in a while. They're listening to the design professional who has photoshop open 24/7. They guy who lives in photoshop is their customer. That's the person who's willing to drop $1k on a piece of software - the other common guy is just going to download the trial and block activate.adobe.com. If you think photoshop is bloatware, it's because you aren't using all of its features. Photoshop is vast in its depth. Keeping a thousand states of a high res picture in ram takes a lot of memory. Keeping hundreds of composited layers and transforms in ram is equally hungry. You can curtail your ram usage if you want it to use less - the default is set to be fairly greedy. For myself though, I have photoshop set to use up to 20GB of RAM (and I routinely hit that mark) with a dedicated SSD for caching, but that's because I use 80-90% of the features in photoshop. If you're only using 10% of the program, consider switching programs.
- XLcommerce 15y ago
  Yeah that's a fair enough comment. The truth is that I'm probably using more like 2% of the program. I think for someone like me the perfect balance of features/performance was at about cs2/cs3 maybe even cs1, I cant remember. So I most likely will be downgrading.
  - Terretta 15y ago
    Check out Pixelmator or Acorn?

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

sgdesign 15y ago

Nice list of new features here: http://bjango.com/articles/photoshopcs6/ http://bjango.com/articles/photoshopcs6/ Seems they addressed a lot of criticism, and improved the UI for web designers in particular.

duck 15y ago

Not related to CS6... but has anyone been successful using Photoshop with Linux? I've tried getting it to run through wine before, but never with any luck.

lbotos 15y ago
I never had any luck getting it to work on Linux :( Honestly, If They mac CS for Linux I'd consider leaving the Mac "ecosystem".
- techtalsky 15y ago
  It's hard to imagine it being worth the cost proposition for them to support several flavors of Lunux plus all of the hardware driver support issues that would crop up. It would cost them a tremendous amount in development, upkeep, and support. I'm sure there's a market for it... just not big enough to be worth it.
epikur 15y ago
Here's an answer to that from a couple hours ago. https://twitter.com/#!/dhowe/status/182691163936006146 https://twitter.com/#!/dhowe/status/182691163936006146 David Howe - ‏ @dhowe - Director of Photoshop Engineering @ColinHarrington We have looked at Wine on & off, the last time a few years ago. Not usually a high-enough priority given other demands. 12:52 AM - 22 Mar 12
adrahon 15y ago
I've found CS2 to work with Wine. Wasn't there a story of Google contributing code to Wine to make Photoshop work? CS5 is listed as Gold on http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=17 http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application... I use The Gimp anyway (I know, I know).
- danieldk 15y ago
  Actually, browsing that entry paints a bleaker picture. Of the five most recent testing reports, two are gold, one silver, one bronze, one garbage. According to the bronze report: The text tool causes the entire application to freeze (even with atmlib installed). The paintbrush works only very intermittently. Moving and docking panels was buggy, and the bluish docking indicators instead rendered as black rectangles making it impossible to see. and: What was not tested: Vector manipulations, filters, adjustment layers. It's fine for playing with Photoshop on Linux a bit, but not something you'd want to rely on for your business. I guess a virtual machine with Windows is still the most viable solution.

lbotos 15y ago

I'm downloading the beta now but a question for any Creative Suite users, have you had any luck getting CS apps to work when installed anywhere else but /applications on Mac? I have multiple users on this mac and only want CS to be usable for one user. I've moved the apps into ~/applications but updates break. :/ Also, Is it just me or do any other Mac users get infuriated with their folder/app structure?

axbx 15y ago
> Also, Is it just me or do any other Mac users get infuriated with their folder/app structure? Adobe's complete disrespect for your file system is legendary. And to make the experience even worse, if you move the 7 useless folders in say /Applications into something like /Applications/Adobe (that you never use anyway), their software updater breaks all over the place.
- uxp 15y ago
  It's a hack, but if you have XCode installed, you can outright hide the directories. /usr/bin/SetFile -a V /Applications/Adobe\ Foo

natesm 15y ago

The layer stack system is getting really tired. Here's what I'd like to see: - Node-based layer system, like Quartz Composer and Max/MSP. Right now, any complex nesting of layer styles has to be done via Smart Objects, which is a terrible hack that has you saving, seeing what the effect on the final image is, then going back and making more changes, repeat. - It's 2012. There should not be destructive filters anymore. All filters should just be another node in this layout. If you'd like to apply them, you should be able to right click a node and merge everything that feeds into it. Brushes should also be usable as layers. Composite everything. - Where's this layer system going to go? Obviously, it will go on screen, but how about an iPad app that pairs with Photoshop for displaying and altering it? They already have something sort of like this for tools. - Photoshop badly needs usable variables of some sort. I'm tired of jumping around 5 different places because I decided I want to change a color. - Going with the last one, documents should be able to contain multiple images, like Illustrator does. This would be a great addition for icon design, since you could (easily, without ugly hacks) have all of your sizes in the same document. Combine that with variables, and... - Finally, stop the sucky non-native UI already. Stop replacing perfectly good Cocoa widgets with terrible Air ones. Adding fancy new features is nice and stuff, but the fundamental UI of this application is getting really dated.

terhechte 15y ago
I've been waiting for variables for years, so sad it's still not there. Not only for colors, but also for values like shadow width, etc.
gramsey 15y ago
Definitely agree with the non-native UI point. I've been using Photoshop for years on my Macbooks, and the interface has always had a clunky, slow, unnatural, and Flash-era feel to it. I wonder what the reasoning behind using this terrible UI vs Cocoa is?
- illicium 15y ago
  Portability. It would be very inconvenient to maintain two completely separate UI codebases.

cageface 15y ago

I hope they're devoting some resources to Fireworks. For web & mobile app graphics I find it far more effective than Photoshop but there are still a lot of rough edges to smooth out.

tomkin 15y ago

I think this is going to be the Photoshop where people seriously start considering a web-based alternative. Not because CS6 will be poor software, but because I think the division among users who use Photoshop for photo editing/professional photography/restoration/stationary/brochure design and those who use it for designing web sites and applications is getting greater. The latter needing less of the options available in Photoshop today, let alone CS6. I say this with over 10 years of experience as a designer/developer – Photoshop needs a Basecamp simplicity-inspired derivative. I think as we move to more institutional, common & predictable UI (if we do), we'll find that we're doing very simple tasks and that those tasks can be taken from Photoshop and automated for the purpose of web/app design and execution. I know there are a few alternatives to Photoshop already, but of all the ones I've seen (yes, even Pixelmator) none of them really go for just the web industry. I think the market for such a tool (hopefully web-based) would be pretty great at this point – and given the audience – using state-of-the-art browser API wouldn't be much of an issue. Long ago, Adobe had this product called "Photoshop Server" or something similar. I believe it was based off of Macromedia's Generator (which generated server-side Flash content). The concept was neat - place variables within a PSD, upload it and allow the server to render out based on what you wanted to show. The problem with this, of course, was that it was proprietary, heavy, expensive and overall pretty crappy. It would be really interesting to see someone create a web-based web design/development application that interacted with some OSS library that most hosting companies would allow (like gd, ning, etc), read .json and interpret data within the image. Probably a bad idea, but how big would a .json-based image be compared to the average jpg? Pretty big, I'll bet. But I wonder with gzip compression how manageable could it be? Would be really cool to define information (text inside of the image, accessibility, SEO capabilities) within a .json-based image. No license required and it would be readable by any human or software. { "dimensions": { "width": 3, "height": 3 }, "data": [ ["rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)"], ["rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)"], ["rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)","rgba(255,255,255,1)"] ] } Yep. That would be huge. I suppose that is a massive digression of the topic but this would be my ideal image format, outside of svg/canvas of course.

batista 15y ago
I think this is going to be the Photoshop where people seriously start considering a web-based alternative. Not because CS6 will be poor software, but because I think the division among users who use Photoshop for photo editing/professional photography/restoration/stationary/brochure design and those who use it for designing web sites and applications is getting greater. The latter needing less of the options available in Photoshop today, let alone CS6. Photoshop is used by creative professionals first and foremost. It's a $600+ software package. (The people using Photoshop that don't need much of it's power are mostly those that use a pirated copy for some basic home use). That said, there is Photoshop Elements already, a cut down version. And there is a web version made by Adobe too. That said, web editors: sucked, and still suck. For some very basic stuff ok. But try even uploading your last 100 12mo pictures you took with your compact camera. Even uploading and editing one by one, it will take ages, usually taking down the browser at some point.

speednoise 15y ago

Great overview of what's new from Marc Edwards http://bjango.com/articles/photoshopcs6/ http://bjango.com/articles/photoshopcs6/

dutchbrit 15y ago

I get an Access Denied when trying to download the beta..

mvkel 15y ago

I'm going to try Pixelmator again. There's absolutely no reason why this app should need an installer.

jjcm 15y ago
The built in GPU acceleration depends on quite a few libraries. Not only that, but the interface is entirely custom (based on air). Photoshop isn't some little stand alone app. It's a 2GB behemoth. Why wouldn't it have an installer?
- mvkel 15y ago
  My point was more big-picture. The app shouldn't have an entirely custom Air-based UI when there are great Cocoa libraries available. Hell, even a hybrid with some Cocoa would be better (ala Aperture). It _should_ be a stand alone app at this point. The argument about "people wouldn't want to transfer to the new UI" is conjecture. Film pros have been switching to new versions of Final Cut Pro without complaint.

cynix 15y ago

Still can't install on a case-sensitive file system. Seriously Adobe, how hard is it to fix your Makefiles?

snorkel 15y ago

Download for free or the usual first-born list price?