Adobe CS3

[timwhit]

The new CS3 line of Adobe products is a real pain in the ass.

With that out of the way. I have been trying to install Adobe Creative Suite 3 (CS3) for the last hour and a half or so.

See the problem is that most of the applications only support Windows XP SP2 or Windows Vista. NO Windows 2k3 Server, NO Win2k, nothing else. I can't understand how they could design a whole product line that won't install on Win2k3 Server. CS2 installed fine and runs great. From what I have read, it is just "unsupported," so they won't allow it to install in the first place, even if it runs fine. Talk about idiocy.

I finally found a program called Application Verifier where I can spoof a Windows XP SP2 environment to the installer and trick it into installing. But, before I can do that I have to uninstall Adobe Creative Suite 2, because the new version won't upgrade the old version.

Pure genius at work here, folks.

I just hope that I can finish off the install and it doesn't crap out on me. I've always known that Adobe was an evil company, but it is becoming ever more apparent with new versions of their products. First activation, now their products will only install on two OS's.

And since they bought Macromedia, there isn't even that alternative out there anymore.

 

[sechs]

I hate to break it to you, but you and the thousand possible other folks who want to use their product on a server operating system aren't worth the tens of thousands of dollars that you might pay. To make you happy would cost more than that.

Heck, it isn't even worth the millions that x64 users might pay for Adobe to support them!

 

[timwhit]

Rather than limiting my ability to install, wouldn't it be easier to put a warning in the installer that said something like, "This product is unsupported in your operating system, proceeding with this installation is not recommended." Then allowing me to install anyways, instead of just not allowing it at all. They had to spend time to code the installer to refuse to install in "unsupported" operating systems.

Like I said before, CS2 worked perfectly fine, as did Dreamweaver and Flash 8. There is NO reason for this limitation, other than to anger people.

If you use Adobe products, I would not recommend "upgrading" to CS3. CS2 was working fine; I don’t know what the hell I was even thinking.

 

[ddrueding]

But isn't CS3 the first o be officially supported in Vista?

Not saying it matters to me, but I'm sure it does to someone...

 

[timwhit]

But isn't CS3 the first o be officially supported in Vista?

Not saying it matters to me, but I'm sure it does to someone...

I believe so. Who in their right mind would install Vista though? Oh yeah, I remember now.

 

[ddrueding]

right mind? I have no idea.

 

[sechs]

Rather than limiting my ability to install, wouldn't it be easier to put a warning in the installer that said something like, "This product is unsupported in your operating system, proceeding with this installation is not recommended."

Nope. Then they'd have to support that.

It's actually better to restrict you from installing on an unsupported platform. That Acrobat installs on Windows XP x64 has caused much pain, because it doesn't work correctly out of the box, and people keep calling up for support; if it simply didn't install on that operating system, a lot of time, money, and effort is saved.

If you use Adobe products, I would not recommend "upgrading" to CS3. CS2 was working fine; I don’t know what the hell I was even thinking.

I and a lot of folks in the know agree. The improvements to the suite applications are fairly incremental. Improved integration is really the only compelling reason to buy into CS3; otherwise, it might only be worth upgrading a particular application.

 

[mubs]

I believe so. Who in their right mind would install Vista though?

At some point in the future, I will try to use PS (or CS) with Vista-64. Only reason is for large memory support. Maybe I'm a fool. :joker:

 

[timwhit]

Mubs: I think you will have more problems installing than I had.

Though I did get it to install successfully on Windows 2003 Server. I feel like I deserve a cookie.

From what I can tell everything works perfectly so far. Once again, Adobe is being obstinate, if it runs fine, why do they not allow me to install???

 

[sechs]

They didn't test it, so they don't know if it works right. It costs money to test -- more than it's worth.

 

[Adcadet]

I had the same problem a year or two ago with SAS (the statistical package) and Server 2003.

 

[Piyono]

I and a lot of folks in the know agree. The improvements to the suite applications are fairly incremental. Improved integration is really the only compelling reason to buy into CS3; otherwise, it might only be worth upgrading a particular application.

Untrue. The new non-destructive effects in PS3 are *enormously* helpful. I've been waiting for this for a long time. I'm also quite enamoured of the new UI. So far. I haven't purchased it yet but from what I saw just by playing with the public betas it was worth the upgrade. Illustrator also has some cool new features, as I recall.

Of course, YMMV.


]-[

 

[sechs]

So, would you buy CS3 just to get the latest version of Photoshop?

 

[Piyono]

So, would you buy CS3 just to get the latest version of Photoshop?

Possibly. These tools do contribute to my income and I could break even after a job or two.

]-[

 

[ddrueding]

I've been using the demo of CS3 and I must say they are still a step up from Microsoft. Although it is likely possible to do the same things in both, I don't think anyone would choose CS2 over CS3 if they were making the purchasing decision now.

 

[sechs]

Just like no one would choose XP over Vista?

 

[ddrueding]

That would be their step up from Microsoft. Could I have worded that more clearly?

 

[Mercutio]

I think so, yes.

 

[sechs]

I don't see AdobeOS in the offing....