main
Report a problem

Adobe releases Creative Suite 4

Tom Warren   on 23 September 2008 - 10:34 · 38 comments & 11532 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Adobe released details Monday about Creative Suite 4, its first update to more than a dozen design and editing tools since Adobe CS3 some 17 months ago.

The costs of the applications, set to reach consumers in October, haven't changed since CS3, but remain hefty. Should longtime users upgrade?

Of course that depends on the specific tools you need. However, we suspect that only the most well-heeled will jump at the chance, as CS4 shares the majority of tools with its predecessor. Perhaps more dramatic, life-changing alterations will come with the next Creative Suite. That said, time-saving tweaks to Illustrator and Flash in particular could lure professionals immersed in them to upgrade.

With CS4, Adobe aimed to unify the interfaces of more than a dozen applications, including Flash and other former properties of Macromedia. You'll see similar pull down menus for toggling among workspaces that you can customize, as well as Flash-based panels that nicely snap open and shut. Corporate design departments will find plenty of enhancements for their teams to share work more quickly.

View: news.com

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 38 additional comments
(7 replies) #1 C++ on 23 Sep 2008 - 10:46
I, for one, will not be upgrading to these tools. Every new version of Adobe software I've used pretty much since Photoshop 5.0 seems to double the resource consumption while offering nothing but petty improvements.

I checked out the CS4 website and one of the "top" new features was a tool to rotate your image, so that you don't have to do it from the menu. Give me a break...

Yea, there are a few gems. Healing brush, for example. But on the whole, I am currently using CS3 and actually thinking of downgrading rather than upgrading.

Foxit software has already proved what a bloated piece of crap Adobe Reader is. Now if only someone were to do the same with Photoshop, Flash and Dreamweaver...
#1.1 BoondockSaint on 23 Sep 2008 - 11:01
The GPU acceleration in Photoshop is well worth it imho.
#1.2 Raa on 23 Sep 2008 - 11:05
Bashing Adobe Reader just doesn't do anything for your arguement. AR9 is the leanest and meanest reader that's been released. And 8 wasn't that shabby either.
#1.3 Skyfrog on 23 Sep 2008 - 11:38
I bought version 7 a long time ago for the healing brush alone (hurray for student discounts! ) and since then I've yet to see anything in the new versions I need. They're just slower, and certainly not worth the cost of upgrading for me. Of course I'm not really the target market for this program; I'd guess very few people that have it (especially those who didn't pay) are.
#1.4 Chonson on 23 Sep 2008 - 11:54
They're just slower, and certainly not worth the cost of upgrading for me.


That's where GPU support will come into its own. Finally taking load off the CPU as graphics chips become more powerful and affordable at the same time. Perhaps it will run a little crappy if you don't have a PC with a decent graphics card but most professionals do, and it remains idle while using Photoshop. Until now at least.
#1.5 virtorio on 23 Sep 2008 - 12:12
Photoshop CS3 seems a lot faster than Photoshop CS2 to me, and Reader 9 is their best version in many years and to me is much nicer to use than Foxit.
#1.6 PureLegend on 23 Sep 2008 - 19:30
Spot Healing Brush is pretty cool, as is Photomerge.
#1.7 BoondockSaint on 24 Sep 2008 - 01:08
(Skyfrog said @ #1.3)
I bought version 7 a long time ago for the healing brush alone (hurray for student discounts! ) and since then I've yet to see anything in the new versions I need. They're just slower, and certainly not worth the cost of upgrading for me. Of course I'm not really the target market for this program; I'd guess very few people that have it (especially those who didn't pay) are.


Well - if you're jumping from version 7 to CS3, that's a big leap in terms of functionality so it is not unreasonable that it is slower. Running CS3 on a current machine (as long as you have 2+ Gb of RAM), you won't notice it being any slower than 7....
#2 Lasker on 23 Sep 2008 - 10:47
I can't wait to test these applications
(3 replies) #3 zape on 23 Sep 2008 - 11:20
OK has CS4 been released yet or has it simply been announced?
#3.1 vetneufuse on 23 Sep 2008 - 11:44
(zape said @ #3)
OK has CS4 been released yet or has it simply been announced?


Yeah, the title seems misleading, not sure if its releated or press info is released
#3.2 excalpius on 23 Sep 2008 - 14:36
It's only been announced. The title is wrong, in order to drive up ad hits on all of these blog sites. Sigh.
#3.3 Express on 23 Sep 2008 - 17:10
(excalpius said @ #3.2)
It's only been announced. The title is wrong, in order to drive up ad hits on all of these blog sites. Sigh.


I was it was available to buy on Adobe's site.
So may be it has indeed been released.
(6 replies) #4 ozgeek on 23 Sep 2008 - 11:28
Sigh, another update, but why?
#4.1 vetneufuse on 23 Sep 2008 - 11:43
(ozgeek said @ #4)
Sigh, another update, but why?


64-bit support and GPU processing? kinda big improvements there
#4.2 tiagosilva29 on 23 Sep 2008 - 11:50
(neufuse said @ #4.1)
(ozgeek said @ #4)
Sigh, another update, but why?


64-bit support and GPU processing? kinda big improvements there


Only in Photoshop, if I'm not mistaken.
#4.3 +TCLN Ryster on 23 Sep 2008 - 12:15
The interface improvements in Dreamweaver seem pretty good to. Comparing CS3 to CS4 and you can see that CS3 wastes quite a lot of screen real-estate. The CS4 interface is much more streamlined if you ask me.

It wasn't the most stable application I've ever used though, but it was a beta version so I guess a degree of that is expected.
#4.4 +stevember on 23 Sep 2008 - 12:18
(ozgeek said @ #4)
Sigh, another update, but why?


Live view rendering JS, Editing associated files without opening. 2 great addition DW.

No distorting 8 point stretching, auto guides amazing in FW.

Perhaps you should try before commenting.

Now, whether worth full version upgrade at there prices I dunno.

If they half cost they quadruple there Genuine users.

Last edited by stevember on 23 Sep 2008 - 13:10
#4.5 tiagosilva29 on 23 Sep 2008 - 12:50
(stevember said @ #4.4)
Perhaps you should try before commenting.


Nope. And you should read, before commenting. ozgeek questioned about the update, then neufuse stated that there was 64-bit support and GPU processing (the claim is made in general), and I pointed out that the claim is not made in general, but in a rather particular application, Photoshop.

And I'm not going to try it. No need.
#4.6 +stevember on 23 Sep 2008 - 13:09
(tiagosilva29 said @ #4.5)
(stevember said @ #4.4)
Perhaps you should try before commenting.


Nope. And you should read, before commenting. ozgeek questioned about the update, then neufuse stated that there was 64-bit support and GPU processing (the claim is made in general), and I pointed out that the claim is not made in general, but in a rather particular application, Photoshop.

And I'm not going to try it. No need.


I was answering your original question...
#5 dysmatik on 23 Sep 2008 - 12:43
never again
(2 replies) #6 +Kirkburn on 23 Sep 2008 - 13:04
To those whining:

You realise you are apparently suggesting Adobe stop development of these apps? There's only so much you can add to these apps, so it is almost always going to be about refining the tools already available, and updating the UI and backend.

If you have CS3 of course you're not going to find huge improvements. However, anyone who doesn't likely will. Think about how much sports games change between their yearly releases.
#6.1 +acxz on 23 Sep 2008 - 13:56
While I get what you're saying, there's a world of difference between a $60 video game and a $700 professional software package.
#6.2 buletov on 23 Sep 2008 - 17:08
(acxz said @ #6.1)
While I get what you're saying, there's a world of difference between a $60 video game and a $700 professional software package.


Indeed it is.
A professional will earn 700$ in a about a week using this professional software package.
A gamer, on the other hand, will pay extra for eventual bandwidth and online subscription.
#7 theyarecomingforyou on 23 Sep 2008 - 13:10
Well, I just checked and CS4 Design Premium is twice the price of the previous version. I was looking to get it in the not too distance future but that's just crazy money.
(2 replies) #8 Burst404 on 23 Sep 2008 - 15:48
As always, Adobe is overpriced.

If they sold it for a hundred bucks, they'd make more money than at the thousands they're asking for now.

Get off it, Adobe.
#8.1 McG on 23 Sep 2008 - 16:36
Except, as many learn is high school level economics, that's not true at all.
#8.2 BoondockSaint on 24 Sep 2008 - 01:16
(Burst404 said @ #
As always, Adobe is overpriced.

If they sold it for a hundred bucks, they'd make more money than at the thousands they're asking for now.

Get off it, Adobe.


Yeah right, and they would really be able to pay for their development costs at $100. You do realise these tools are targeted at professionals not home users. I know a lot of people *want* Photoshop, simply to say they have it, but will never actually utilise its functionality.

We have 3 licensed copies of the Suite in the office, and intend to upgrade all of them - we sit all day every day in Photoshop, Dreamweaver and to an extent Illustrator, so the money for the new versions is small compared to what it brings in to our company.
(1 reply) #9 leo221 on 23 Sep 2008 - 15:53
photoshop has become the definition of bloatware since 7.0
#9.1 SirEvan on 23 Sep 2008 - 16:18
(leo221 said @ #9)
photoshop has become the definition of bloatware since 7.0


Yeaaap. Thats right... CS3 Extended starts for me in oh...about 10 seconds? thats definately bloat. Oh yes.. So massive. Total install size of around 500 MB or so I think...yeah thats definately bloat. Nevermind the shear power that it provides professionals for manipulating images...oh no...couldn't be that impressive...all bloated and all....

GIVE ME A BREAK

/sarcasm.


Congrats Adobe, been waiting for 64bit support for a while. now to see if i can afford the upgrade.
#10 Shadrack on 23 Sep 2008 - 17:04
I use to rely on Photoshop everyday for the most basic stuff (color adjustments, image cropping, format transcoding...etc.).

I now use Paint.NET for those basic needs. Does anyone know of a good alternative to Adobe Illustrator? I still use it (although I'm on a rather ancient version, 7). But would definitely like to find some freeware/cheaper alternative for vector graphics.
#11 hotdog963al on 23 Sep 2008 - 18:28
*Hugs CS2*
#12 naap51stang on 24 Sep 2008 - 01:40
I'd say about 99% of the people complaining about photoshop, probably have it pirated, never use 2/3 of its features anyway. It's designed for PROFESSIONALS. If you are a casual user, you should be using photo elements or similar.
(1 reply) #13 MaJoR on 24 Sep 2008 - 03:23
Deceptive title alert!

Adobe releases Creative Suite 4


Adobe released details Monday about Creative Suite 4, its first update to more than a dozen...
#13.1 Dessimat0r on 29 Sep 2008 - 14:58
Agreed, another instance of misleading journalism on Neowin.
#14 Doli on 24 Sep 2008 - 05:36
For a professional company the upgrade prices are not that bad.
#15 Examinus on 24 Sep 2008 - 17:44
The new UI in Dreamweaver and live Preflight in InDesign are worth it alone!
#16 Skwerl on 26 Sep 2008 - 17:50
Did you check out the demo for Content-Aware Scaling? That's pretty impressive, and a gigantic time-saver. The 3D object painting is nice, too. I remember doing that on an SGI Octane with Pirhana/Amazon Paint when those were the big packages. This looks dramatically better, and little has come close to those programs' power since. Check out the live preflight, conditional text, and smart guides (like in Visual Studio! features of InDesign. Awesome! The overprint preview will be helpful for printers, too. Add the 64-bit support and GPU acceleration for Photoshop, and there's actually some compelling reasons to upgrade. It's not a cheap upgrade, but to certain folks it will be well worth it.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)