PDA

View Full Version : Photoshop rip off....



Dodgy
04-05-2007, 04:12 AM
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/05/pay_twice_you_wish/

PS CS3 upgrade for US customers: $471.90 with Californian sales tax

PS CS3 upgrade for UK customers: £546.38, equivalent to $1080.31!!!


We have a long history of serving our customers in local markets the way they want to do business

We love to be ripped off in the UK....

Thomas M.
04-05-2007, 04:19 AM
The same in Germany.

Amazon.de for Extended 1600€,
Amazon.com for Extended ca.800€ (990$).

Rip off doesn't really cover my feelings.

A f... you is on my lips, but my manners don't allow to say it loud.

Cheers
Thomas

P.S.: I wonder what happens if I order the American version via a middleman. Can I only use U.S. keyboard, or is it locked to the States for registration in a wired way? Let's find out and don't pay for this overpriced b...s..t!

BazC
04-05-2007, 04:23 AM
P.S.: I wonder what happens if I order the American version via a middleman. Can I only use U.S. keyboard, or is it locked to the States for registration in a wired way? Let's find out and don't pay for this overpriced b...s..t!

The sites I have checked (Amazon.com and SafeHarbor) say that their contract with Adobe prevents them from selling outside the US. If you can get a friend to buy it and post it to you I think it should work OK.

DiedonD
04-05-2007, 04:31 AM
The sites I have checked (Amazon.com and SafeHarbor) say that their contract with Adobe prevents them from selling outside the US. If you can get a friend to buy it and post it to you I think it should work OK.

Yeah... Thats how I always did. Down here there is no LW, a good Llaptop, Latest Graphic Card and thing as such are not available "At the markets" . Nah, nah, nah. Theres always someone going abroad and coming back twice as heavier.

ZWF_BES
04-05-2007, 05:20 AM
Adobe is getting insane it seems. Therefor we changed to this one:

http://www.pl32.com/

Its 60 Euros (without manual) and does the things we need. Also the developers are open to changes.

AbnRanger
04-05-2007, 05:39 AM
Yeah, if you guys in Europe can find out definitively that having a copy purchased in the U.S. and subsequently shipped to you there, would present no legal/registration issues...I think it's fair to say that most of us guys here in the US would be glad to help.
I agree about the absurdity of the price difference. Totally inexcusable.

Thomas M.
04-05-2007, 05:45 AM
That's the point. Adobe is the market leader and there's no real alternative. At least none that I'd knew of. So, is it possible to switch to another keyboard version in the American PS? If yes, that's indeed a non brainer.

starbase1
04-05-2007, 05:57 AM
And while we are at it, three cheers for Newtek for bringing their prices in line with the exchange rate fast!

AbnRanger
04-05-2007, 06:00 AM
I guess they'll have to buy a US keyboard, and a US mouse (since UK guys drive on the opposite side of the street...they'll need a left hand mouse to avoid a collision wiht the oncoming American keyboard). :D just kid'n

AbnRanger
04-05-2007, 06:08 AM
That's the point. Adobe is the market leader and there's no real alternative. At least none that I'd knew of. So, is it possible to switch to another keyboard version in the American PS? If yes, that's indeed a non brainer.
Corel Painter may not be the "Industry Standard", but functionally it's no slouch. In actuality, it's far more Artisan than photoshop.
If Adobe is going to be like that, then I'm especially glad I went with Combustion instead of After Effects.

mattclary
04-05-2007, 06:25 AM
Even better, find someone to buy it for you, then have them post the iso on an FTP for you. Saves you mailing charges.

prospector
04-05-2007, 06:50 AM
we're just getting revenge for that goofy tea tax put on us about 300 years ago.... :D

Matt
04-05-2007, 07:28 AM
Thank god for torrents!

;)

(That WAS a joke BTW!)

Matt
04-05-2007, 07:37 AM
This is a good round up of local currency vs dollar rip off:

http://www.amanwithapencil.com/adobe.html

Snosrap
04-05-2007, 07:46 AM
Corel Painter may not be the "Industry Standard", but functionally it's no slouch.

Neither is Corel PhotoPaint, my "Photoshop" of choice. It's part of the Corel Draw Graphics Suite package @$399 US. It gets no respect, but it can go head-to-head with Photoshop and Illustrator any day.

Cheers
Snosrap

Thomas M.
04-05-2007, 08:16 AM
Just took the link and went directly to the EU commission web site and filled out the form.

If I ever hear this company complaining about software piracy I'll take a big laugh. A pirat steeling money from other persons wallets complaining about stolen software. Isn't that great?

Phil
04-05-2007, 08:52 AM
Neither is Corel PhotoPaint, my "Photoshop" of choice. It's part of the Corel Draw Graphics Suite package @$399 US. It gets no respect, but it can go head-to-head with Photoshop and Illustrator any day.

Cheers
Snosrap

Sadly, though, no Mac version.

starbase1
04-05-2007, 08:58 AM
we're just getting revenge for that goofy tea tax put on us about 300 years ago.... :D

Well of course, things were very different in those days. For example, America was being governed by a congenital warmongering idiot called George, who only got the job because his father had it before him...

:devil:

BazC
04-05-2007, 09:03 AM
I keep hearing rumours of an Apple Photoshop alternative in development (no not Aperture) I REALLY hope it's true! :D

Limbus
04-05-2007, 09:27 AM
It really is a rip off. I signed the petition and hope that it might change something. Maybe it even helps to call up Adobe in germany and ask them why the english version is much more expensive. I can understand that they charge extra for the german version but not for the english one.
:2guns:

Florian

Ztreem
04-05-2007, 11:21 AM
Strange!? Here in Sweden a PS CS3 Upgrade only costs around $357(English version). In Sweden the English version is cheaper than the Swedish one.

Wonderpup
04-05-2007, 11:44 AM
If I ever hear this company complaining about software piracy I'll take a big laugh.

This is a very good point- it's exactly this behavior that the people who use pirated software point at to justify what they do- why should the users play by the rules when the vendors are doing this kind of thing- it may not be illegal-I guess they can charge what they like- but it certainly undermines their moral position as regards software theft.

kopperdrake
04-05-2007, 11:51 AM
The simple thing is to look for alternatives. Adobe of all companies should be aware of what happens to greedy companies who treat their consumers like idiot sheep, need i say any more than Quark and InDesign? They should not forget that sheep have wallets.

AbnRanger
04-05-2007, 11:55 AM
Yeah...I guess if enough Europeans e-mail Adobe, not only complaining about the difference, but REMIND them that this sort of practice only serves to fuel an increase in piracy....that might get their attention.

zardoz
04-05-2007, 12:14 PM
yep here in Portugal the same upgrade is 1,072.23 USD (€ 798.60) for the Creative Suite 3 Design Premium. I checked the uk and us sites and all these values confirm. RIP OFF!

And if we were swimming in money I could close my eyes...

ercaxus
04-05-2007, 12:26 PM
It is interesting while there's an open source alternative to almost anything, Photoshop has no such competition. I believe Adobe guys are bribing Gimp people so they won't turn Gimp into something that is easy to use, or maybe Gimp guys are just not the brightest people on the world. :D

mattclary
04-05-2007, 12:43 PM
Anyone know how MicroSoft's prices work out for Europe? As much as the EU is up their butt with a microscope, seems like they would have gotten nailed to the wall for this kind of blatant price gouging.

I thought it was bogus that NewTek charged (I guess they fixed this?) the same numerical amount for LightWave, ignoring exchange rates, but at least I could see an INKLING of why you would do that ($399 and 399 Euros makes the price easy to remember), but Adobe is all over the freaking map, charging a higher numerical value on top of the exchange rate.

meathead
04-05-2007, 01:49 PM
Get Coreldraw X3 suite as the others stated.

It's very good, and you are supporting the competition. I use Coreldraw instead of Illustrator every day.


Drives me crazy when printers do not accept Corel files. But Corel lets you Import anything, and export out to anything.

T-Light
04-05-2007, 02:16 PM
Mattclary -

Anyone know how MicroSoft's prices work out for Europe?
I was thinking exactly the same thing, they're also double the US prices, 99$ upgrade = £99 upgrade apparently :eek:

Maybe Adobe just made a mistake, I was in a US bank once changing GB pounds to US Dollars, they tried to give me less dollars for the pounds, promising me that it the 1.87 to 1 exchange rate was actually 1.87 pounds to one dollar. Rediculous, they called the manager and even He had it to look it up :D

anieves
04-05-2007, 04:02 PM
Wow, that's quite a huge difference. I'm wondering if it is an upgrade to the "Extended" version...

At least the issue is getting publicity and is not something Adobe tried to sneak in... at least not anymore. They will loose business.
Speak with your wallet.

toby
04-05-2007, 05:28 PM
I keep hearing rumours of an Apple Photoshop alternative in development (no not Aperture) I REALLY hope it's true! :D
Any alternative would be great, especially if it specialized in cg production instead of Print. I can't believe there hasn't been anything like this by now, and PS has been slow as a worm to offer theirs.

toby
04-05-2007, 05:31 PM
It really is a rip off. I signed the petition and hope that it might change something.
The petition is here btw:
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/fair-pricing-for-european-software.html

Sarford
04-05-2007, 05:45 PM
Like I said before, Adobe is rapidly becomming the microsoft of the graphics industry.

It was a blatent sign, the minute they (un)legaly bought Macromedea, they changed the site. You remember those cool video's Macromedea had playing on their homepage? Always creative video's displaying creative people doing creative things with their creative software.
Adobe changed that quickly to bankers, buiders and a medical assistent(!) using adobe software in their business... For a moment I though I was on the website of microsoft!

Adobe isn't the 'small' graphics software company anymore. Its a big corporation. And like any corporation who finds itself lacking any competitors, they gonna bulley their customers.

Oh and Wonderpup, ever noticed its always the bigges and richest companies who make such a drama of piracy? If piracy was such a big problem to them, how did they become the biggest and richest in the business?

AbnRanger
04-05-2007, 09:19 PM
Like I said before, Adobe is rapidly becomming the microsoft of the graphics industry.

It was a blatent sign, the minute they (un)legaly bought Macromedea, they changed the site. You remember those cool video's Macromedea had playing on their homepage? Always creative video's displaying creative people doing creative things with their creative software.
Adobe changed that quickly to bankers, buiders and a medical assistent(!) using adobe software in their business... For a moment I though I was on the website of microsoft!

Adobe isn't the 'small' graphics software company anymore. Its a big corporation. And like any corporation who finds itself lacking any competitors, they gonna bulley their customers.

Oh and Wonderpup, ever noticed its always the bigges and richest companies who make such a drama of piracy? If piracy was such a big problem to them, how did they become the biggest and richest in the business?Because, unlike Adobe, most professionals have a little bit of integrity. Most businesses are going to shun pirated stuff.
I remember just a few years ago, while in college, Quark Xpress was still considered the "Industry Standard" layout application, and they charged an arm and a leg because of it. Then came Adobe Indesign. Now, it has become the new standard, and as you might expect...Quark's pricing reflects that.

So, I guess it's time to start using Corel...they are pretty [email protected] good, by the way, and despite all their efforts to produce a product that's equal or better; they get little to no respect.
If you have a "Fine Art's" background, Corel Painter is much more suitable for you than Photoshop.
Even though Adobe's inequity in pricing doesn't affect me directly...it's still "Dirty Pool" and therefore it looks like I'll switching soon.

All you guys outside the US, who were looking at upgrading AE...welcome to the world of Combustion! Flame's desktop brother. Quite a pedigree.

toby
04-05-2007, 10:30 PM
Forgot to mention that I'm thouroughly disgusted as well.

Let's familiarize ourselves with Corel by using their free trials, shall we?
http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satellite/gb/en/Content/1152796555406

robk
04-05-2007, 11:29 PM
After years of reading UK computer magazines I agree with the UK Computer users getting ripped off. I just googled a price on a video card and the screen grabs below tell it all.

Here is the currency conversion from XE.com
114.89 GBP = 260.745 CAD
United Kingdom Pounds Canada Dollars
1 GBP = 2.26952 CAD 1 CAD = 0.440622 GBP

Can't see how you guys survive over there with some of the outrageous price you have to pay. Probably a higher cost of living also.

DiedonD
04-06-2007, 01:24 AM
Forgot to mention that I'm thouroughly disgusted as well.

Let's familiarize ourselves with Corel by using their free trials, shall we?
http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satellite/gb/en/Content/1152796555406

Well ok... But the thing thats holding me back for buying Corel instead of Photoshop, and Combustion instead of AE is that I need to relearn it all :thumbsdow Any neat tutorials about them both? Thanks.

wavk
04-06-2007, 01:34 AM
http://kanzelsberger.com

photoshop for 38 bucks.

:)

mlon

AbnRanger
04-06-2007, 01:48 AM
Here's a link to Lynda.com which has a series of video tutorials on Corel Painter and Corel Draw:

http://movielibrary.lynda.com/html/modPage.asp?ID=124

http://movielibrary.lynda.com/html/modPage.asp?ID=215

The first handful of videos in each series is free to view, beyond that it requires $25/month for 24/7 access to their massive library.

Here's a link to a similar service, VTC.com ($30/month):

http://www.vtc.com/products/paintshopprox.htm

http://www.vtc.com/products/painter8.htm

http://www.vtc.com/products/coreldrawx3.htm

The best thing about this particular service is that they have both a (new) Lightwave 9 series, and an Advanced Lightwave Modeling series within their library, as well as Combustion 4, After Effects 7, etc. etc.

http://www.vtc.com/products/lightwave9.htm

AbnRanger
04-06-2007, 02:10 AM
Well ok... But the thing thats holding me back for buying Corel instead of Photoshop, and Combustion instead of AE is that I need to relearn it all :thumbsdow Any neat tutorials about them both? Thanks.The workspace and toolbars for Corel Painter and Paintshop Pro are very similar to Photoshop, so it should be a rather small learning curve.

And since AE and Combustion are primarily layer-based compositors, just learning the UI (nicer than After Effect's IMHO), is the essentially all you need to learn. You already know how to composite.

DiedonD
04-06-2007, 02:30 AM
The workspace and toolbars for Corel Painter and Paintshop Pro are very similar to Photoshop, so it should be a rather small learning curve.

And since AE and Combustion are primarily layer-based compositors, just learning the UI (nicer than After Effect's IMHO), is the essentially all you need to learn. You already know how to composite.

Thats nice to hear. Im checking this Pixel right now, and my second choice is Corel Paint. I think why Adobe has advanced more than Corel, in th days where they were both the same, is because Adobe has AE and Premiere in its Crative suit. I have not heard the same about Corel. Why didnt it too developed an visial affects and Editing software is beyond me.

Combustion is out of the picture. If I had 990$ I would buy AE Instead.

F1Racer
04-06-2007, 02:49 AM
Petition signed.
I can't be doing with these corporate fat-cat tactics.
Then again, when it comes to price differences between UK and US, just look at petrol (or 'gas' to our US buddies).
Cars are the same. Same price in GBP as it is in $ over there.
So a $20,000 car is £20,000 here. Obviously thats a very general statement but you get the idea.

Adobe's response on that manwithapencil.com link is pathetic. Just pure corporate-speak with no real reasoning behind it.

Also that Pixel software looks great ! For its price it seems a bargain and I see it also has HDR support too. Im going to have a good look at that and I think Im already tempted to grab one. Thanks for that link.

BazC
04-06-2007, 03:28 AM
Petition signed.
I can't be doing with these corporate fat-cat tactics.
Then again, when it comes to price differences between UK and US, just look at petrol (or 'gas' to our US buddies).
Cars are the same. Same price in GBP as it is in $ over there.
So a $20,000 car is £20,000 here. Obviously thats a very general statement but you get the idea.

Adobe's response on that manwithapencil.com link is pathetic. Just pure corporate-speak with no real reasoning behind it.

Also that Pixel software looks great ! For its price it seems a bargain and I see it also has HDR support too. Im going to have a good look at that and I think Im already tempted to grab one. Thanks for that link.

Not quite the same, the bulk of petrol costs in the UK are tax plus the US is largely self sufficient in petroleum. We have to buy all ours in from the middle-east. Cars are more complex too with different tax levels, government subsidies etc.

This is purely a matter of Adobe being greedy!

You're right in general terms though we seem to pay more for nearly everything!

BTW, Last time I tried Pixel (maybe 6-8 months ago) it was the most unstable image manipulation app I've ever used. It has great potential but not ready for serious use yet IMO.

philipsavage
04-06-2007, 03:33 AM
Looking at the UK Adobe site it would seem that the upgrade to CS3 is £139 (£163.32 incl VAT) with CS3 Extended being £329 (£386.58 incl VAT)

Sarford
04-06-2007, 05:16 AM
Thank god for the internet. Just imagine this happening twenty years ago... first of all you wouldn't know of the price differences in the different countries and second, it would be near to impossible to get compains together from all over the world...

Wonderpup
04-06-2007, 06:24 AM
I don't think Adobe should understimate the power of internet mythology- if they do come to be generaly percived as a sleazy outfit, justified or not, it will eventualy damage their interests- legends are born very quickly in an online world, and can be very costly to counter.

The money they're pulling in now by what are seen as unfair pricing policies may well have to be spent later in PR to rescue their brand from the damage thus inflicted.

On a personal level my perception of adobe in the past was as a company focused on the tools- now it seems totaly about the money.

The real test of character, for both individuals and corporations is how they behave when given power- and with the aquisition of Macromedia-Adobe have gathered a near monopoly in their market- and so far seem to be failing the test.

Verlon
04-06-2007, 06:33 AM
I didn't check, but if they aren't correcting for currency, can we get the Japanese version for 499 yen? the Mexican version for 499 pesos? Or how about the Canadian version for $499 Canadian?

Hmm didn't think so. I guess they remembered to fix that.

Well, still using Photoshop 7 here, and not seeing any compelling reason to upgrade--though that extended with 3D support looks interesting.

Dodgy
04-06-2007, 08:05 AM
The 3d plugin for painting (in a limited way) for PS works in ps7 so you stll don't have to upgrade :)

3DBob
04-06-2007, 08:14 AM
A dispicable act by a now clear monopoly - sadly the european courts will likely take 5 years to prosecute them and they'll fine them hundreds of millions of dollars that the hardworking freelancers will never see. I actually think they encourage this stuff now - its like Monopoly tax.

If adobe decided to release a linux version of Adobe suite - even M$ could quickly fall as everyone knows that you can get openoffice that does everything 99% of user actually need. That is the power Adobe now holds. Even Corel used flash video on their site to promote their products.

I think the only way to make a big difference (UK at least) is to get this running as a BBC News lead story - and I think it is the worst example of blatently ripping of EU citizens off - particularly the UK ( and the US speaks our language ).

Monopoly law is dead in the US and monopolies are tolerated in EU as long as they can get a big fat back-hander under the pretence of punishment. Capitalism in some markets is moving closer to totalitarianism.

I think software should be on a time based subscription model with micro payments for useage. Therefore - if for most of the time you didn't need PS and could use anything else like Irfanview/Picasa/pixel or whatever, then you pay for what is profitable.

I'm sure they are just trying to raise another huge cashpile to buy up more competitors.

3DBob

AbnRanger
04-06-2007, 09:28 AM
Thats nice to hear. Im checking this Pixel right now, and my second choice is Corel Paint. I think why Adobe has advanced more than Corel, in th days where they were both the same, is because Adobe has AE and Premiere in its Crative suit. I have not heard the same about Corel. Why didnt it too developed an visial affects and Editing software is beyond me.

Combustion is out of the picture. If I had 990$ I would buy AE Instead.I believe they recently acquired Ulead, which has a Video Editing program. I'm not sure if where that's headed.
You can get Combustion 4 at Videoguys.com for $775...it might be worth asking if they have a Competitve Upgrade.
http://www.videoguys.com/discreet.html#combustion4
After Effects CS3, of course, is still $1k:

If you are on a tight budget, maybe a compositor like Mirage Studio or Studio Pro 1.5 is your cup of tea...especially for LW artists, since it has an interactive UV texture painting plugin...and has the most robust painting toolset of any compositor on the market, not to mention it's story-boarding tools.
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/products_mirage_studioPRO.php
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/products_mirage_solutions.php

Lightwave UV texture integration:
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/products_mirage_solutions_3d.php
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/tutorials/lwviewer/mirage_LWViewer_part1_Medium.mov
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/tutorials/lwviewer/mirage_LWViewer_part2_Medium.mov

Lastly, if you're on a shoestring budget, here's a nice compositor for the money:
http://fxhome.com/compositelab/?gclid=CJTOseerrosCFQMLVAod5UH1VQ

Ztreem
04-06-2007, 09:28 AM
I think that not using exchange rates is wrong, but you get Adobe production suite for $3200 and then you get Aftereffects pro, Premiere Pro, Photoshop extended, Illustrator, Flash, Soundbooth, encore. If that is a rip off then Maya unlimited is really a rip off. :)
Of course it would have been nice to only pay $1600 as they do in the US, but that's life. :)

AbnRanger
04-06-2007, 09:43 AM
I think the only way to make a big difference (UK at least) is to get this running as a BBC News lead story - and I think it is the worst example of blatently ripping of EU citizens off - particularly the UK ( and the US speaks our language ).
Heck yeah! They relish any opportunity to bash America (in this case an American Capitalist Conglomerate)...give 'em a call. You'd bring a smile to their face, and brighten their day.

Somehow, they'll find a way to link it to the Bush administration, as some kind of dubious conspiracy to lash out at the liberal Europeans. :D

AbnRanger
04-06-2007, 10:41 AM
Sadly, though, no Mac version.Painter has a Mac version:
http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satellite/us/en/Product/1166553885980

http://www.digitmag.co.uk/reviews/index.cfm?ReviewID=728

Plus, with an Intel powered Mac, you can use "Boot Camp" to run Windows

3DBob
04-06-2007, 11:45 AM
Well here is how a German Company treats UK / American Freelancers:-

Cinema 4D R10 XL - Ex VAT price.... Using actual rate of $1.93/£1 rather than interbank rate as shown on XE.com

UK - US$ 2314

US - US$ 2195

Now can someone explain what is going on here - This is a German company that has to produce an English language version - and STILL the UK pays $119 ($10 more than SILO) more. But this is only 5% more rather than 25-109% more like adobe apps.

I would be getting multiple electronic downloads of the Adobe Web Pro pack Upgrade - So even their distribution to me is negligeable, printing costs 0.

3DBob

Fizzer
04-06-2007, 03:20 PM
3D Bob.

For a long, long time the UK has been called Treasure Island by big International Monoliths. Whether it is cars, Cd's, clothing, software or whatever, the cost has always been higher in the UK. These companies use these islands to pick up the losses they make charging lower prices elsewhere.

From time to time this is picked up by the media and the incumbent government and run with for a while, then forgotten. Nothing is ever done or will ever be done.

Red_Oddity
04-06-2007, 06:07 PM
Soooo, are we talking a Photoshop CS3 'normal' upgrade or 'extended' upgrade, because i have been complaining abot this for a long time now, and we live in the Ntherlands (2 years ago the 'creative suite' cost twice as much when converting the euro price back to dollars than what the US customers paid for it)

Heck i even complained about it on the Adobe forums (among the constructive ideas i had about some things they could improve in their software) and their responce was, as twice before, to just simply ban me, this offcourse after being flamed by all those adobe (and i hate to use this term) 'fan boys'.

The upgrade prices here right now are about 300 euros for the normal upgrade (= $400) and 650 euros for the 'extended' version (= $870)

DiedonD
04-07-2007, 04:30 AM
I believe they recently acquired Ulead, which has a Video Editing program. I'm not sure if where that's headed.
You can get Combustion 4 at Videoguys.com for $775...it might be worth asking if they have a Competitve Upgrade.
http://www.videoguys.com/discreet.html#combustion4
After Effects CS3, of course, is still $1k:

If you are on a tight budget, maybe a compositor like Mirage Studio or Studio Pro 1.5 is your cup of tea...especially for LW artists, since it has an interactive UV texture painting plugin...and has the most robust painting toolset of any compositor on the market, not to mention it's story-boarding tools.
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/products_mirage_studioPRO.php
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/products_mirage_solutions.php

Lightwave UV texture integration:
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/products_mirage_solutions_3d.php
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/tutorials/lwviewer/mirage_LWViewer_part1_Medium.mov
http://www.bauhaussoftware.com/tutorials/lwviewer/mirage_LWViewer_part2_Medium.mov

Lastly, if you're on a shoestring budget, here's a nice compositor for the money:
http://fxhome.com/compositelab/?gclid=CJTOseerrosCFQMLVAod5UH1VQ

Thanks for the links. I have an Editor. Its called Power Director. Dont you just get suspicious when such Grandiose Names these apps have. Or I also have [email protected] And the moment you start tweaking things in it, a dialog box appears saying "Wait a few moments while [email protected] prepares your Masterpiece" . Hah! Nice compliments! One gives you power the other one calls your work a masterpiece. But, yea, I got them free from the Graphic Card. The only problem I have for now is that Power Director wont enable the duration of images to be no less than .02 seconds. And of course we need .01 seconds. And I cant seem to enable .02 seconds even, for all images. So far Ive only managed to do it manually.
A good friend of mine told me that you can also download the free GIMP. Its not so bad neither. Actually Ive downloaded it for free and its pretty ok. I dont know what the great fuss would be if GIMP is the same as PS for the most part, and its free. Its a sharp great technique to come up with a free software exactly when good old apps like Adobe get spoiled and abuse their clients. A good point from where you can just turn your back to old Adobe, and do so with anger and contempt.
But I dont think anything beats After Effects yet. Adobe has me there. Still searching for it. Im looking for used ones as well.

3DBob
04-07-2007, 04:57 AM
It is a struggle to make a living in the UK and this sort of attitude to us is part of the reason.

Why do we continue to accept this kind of treatment....... For 35 years our north sea (UK/Norway) has kept oil prices down.... for the whole world - and the greatest per head benefit has been amarican citizens and their corporations..... This is how we are repaid - by selling their resources at twice price to their allies. Now the oil fields are drying up at an alarming rate - will anyone return the favour?

stinks.

Don't get me wrong - I think individual Americans are awesome - and the software they produce is amazing - I'm just a little jaded when my pocket is pummelled and people laugh and others let it happen. I guess we brits really are too nice. I know its a dog eat dog world - and right now I feel like a poodle that against better judgement has supported a dog that is now eating me.

Ahh - unbalanced protectionist capitalism - don't you love it?

3DBob

T-Light
04-07-2007, 06:47 AM
Ulead's 'Media Studio Pro' is really quite good :) Used it a v4 when working for another company and bought into it at v6. The only downside is that Ulead's tech support isn't too clever. ie
email to Ulead...

Your software uses A and B to define fields, my other software uses Odd and Even or 0 and 1, could you please tell me which is which for PAL DV AVI in Media Studio Pro?
Answer

Consult your camera's documentation
WTF???, Oh yeah, cheers, thanks a bundle :cursin:

Maybe their support will improve now they've been bought out, it better, coz IMHO it was a waste of space before.

Diedond, did you upgrade at LW 8?, the version of DFX given away then has a free AE adapter plugin and (it's only my personal opinion) DFX wipes the floor with AE. :thumbsup:

If I had the cash to be spending on editors right now, Speededit would be the one I was buying, no question.

Titus
04-07-2007, 09:54 AM
Havet you tried The GIMP (http://gimp.org/)? is free and the only drawback I have is the lousy wacom support.

starbase1
04-07-2007, 11:40 AM
Havet you tried The GIMP (http://gimp.org/)? is free and the only drawback I have is the lousy wacom support.

And lack of 16 bit channel support, and kludged photoshop filter support...
I really think those 2 will kill the deal for many.

I really want to like Gimp, but it's just not there yet. I hear that BIG changes are in the pipe for the next version though.

Nick

Titus
04-07-2007, 02:30 PM
16 bit support should be easy to implement but I doubt the usual user may need it (I myself don't use 16 bit images), is just matter of submit this as a new feature. The Python fu scripting in my opinion may lead to interesting plugins.

toby
04-07-2007, 03:02 PM
16 bit support should be easy to implement but I doubt the usual user may need it
Wow, are you kidding? That means you can't even open HDRs much less edit them. I don't know anybody that wouldn't hate being stuck in an 8-bit world.

kopperdrake
04-07-2007, 03:06 PM
Not quite the same, the bulk of petrol costs in the UK are tax plus the US is largely self sufficient in petroleum. We have to buy all ours in from the middle-east. Cars are more complex too with different tax levels, government subsidies etc.

Actually the UK has been self-sufficient in oil and gas production since 1980, and according to the latest figures will do so for another 10 years. Sure there's swapping of resources for peak flows in demand but that will always be the case.

I guess as a small player we're more at the mercy of world-wide fluctuations, but around 70% of our petrol price is tax...one of the highest in the world. Blame the Conservatives for starting the hike in tax on petrol with their Fuel Price Escalator they started in the 1980s, essentially every year the rate of tax on petrol was raised by 3% more than the current inflation rate as a way to raise money and discourage car use on 'environmental grounds'...LOL! Needless to say it hasn't changed much now that it's in place. It was scrapped by Labour a few years ago but our prices still remain high :/

Talk about digression though! I'm going to look at Corel software and that cheap version is worth having a look at, though I like the fact that Corel do vector and pixel-based stuff :D

Sarford
04-07-2007, 03:42 PM
Been looking at the new Adobe Flash CS3 update...
When flash was still macromedia, every flash update was a major step foreward, not only in features but each upgrade also changed the face of the internet.
So whats the big news with the latest version of FLASH?.... ehhh.... well.....you can now change a motion path to actionscript....cool he?....ahem.
Increadible, talk about a non-update. There is absolutly no reason to upgrade flash, non whatsoever. Nice going Adobe!

Titus
04-07-2007, 03:58 PM
Wow, are you kidding? That means you can't even open HDRs much less edit them. I don't know anybody that wouldn't hate being stuck in an 8-bit world.

In my opinion an average user don't use HDRs, that's why there's no 16 bit support.

3DBob
04-07-2007, 04:04 PM
Sorry to digress,

Here are the facts.

The February Edition of the Petroleum Review reports the following words of the British Minister of Trade and Industry, Alistair Darling, commenting on the commencement of production at the Buzzard Field in the North Sea:

“We know that there are still between 15 and 20 bn barrels remaining in the North Sea, and with Buzzard, the UK should return to being a net exporter over the next couple of years”.

The attached plot, based solely on historical production, delivers a firm trend pointing to an ultimate recovery of about 32 Gb, confirmed also by the discovery trend. With 24 Gb having been already produced, it means that 8 Gb are left for the future. This is about double the officially reported reserves yet half the low end of the Minister’s claim.

The peak of oil production in Britain was in 1999 at 2.94 Mb/d, since when it has declined to 1.68 Mb/d in 2005, with the Oil & Gas Journal forecasting 1.48 Mb/d for 2006. Consumption stands at about 1.8 Mb/d, meaning that imports stand at 300 kb/d. The Buzzard Field, which is reported to have 0.55 Gb of Reserves, is expected to produce at about 200 kb/d (or 0.073 Gb/year), giving it a plateau life of about seven years, followed be decline. The addition of the 200 kb/d from Buzzard will lift the national depletion rate (annual production as a percent of what is left) from the current 6.5% to 7.9% a year, accelerating the long term decline.

It is difficult to know how the Minister calculates that Britain will return to be an exporter on the above numbers, unless he anticipates a slump in demand, but even if he uses a different dataset, for example confusing the issue by combining oil and gas in terms of oil-equivalent or exaggerating the yet-to-find, it is evident that Britain will be hard pressed to return to exporter status for more than a few months. The wisdom of welcoming exports at all in the face of the rapid depletion of Britain’s own resources is also open to debate.

AND

The Middle East Region has a crucial role to play in the years ahead. Its share of critical Regular Conventional oil was 4% in 1930, but rose to 37% in 1974, making possible the First Oil Shock. It then fell to 17% in 1985, largely in response to rising production from the North Sea, Alaska and Russia.

Don't cry when the ME is selling its oil at $300 a barrel when it will be supplying most of the worlds remaining conventional oil. They'll be milking all of us that don't have a choice like adobe is doing now - but they'll still be giving the stuff away at home.

Back on topic......

I agree, Flash used to have huge upgrades - and this one is a bit lame to say the least - but it is better integrated with the adobe suite. My issue is there will not be an alternative to flash - so that has to be upgraded - and for many companies who deal with other companies - files are sent as adobe format files - so other softwares are not an option - so we are forced to upgrade. It is starting to feel like a Tax....

3DBob

toby
04-07-2007, 04:37 PM
In my opinion an average user don't use HDRs, that's why there's no 16 bit support.
What, you mean the average Gimp user? Not sure why they'd be entered into this conversation...?
The average LW user is of course very interested in HDRs, and many of us in EXRs, so that would be a deal breaker, as far as replacing Photoshop.

Titus
04-07-2007, 04:56 PM
If you feel being ripped off by Adobe try The GIMP (make your money talk), if this program doesn't have what you need maybe if you ask nicely they will work on it, or even better try a sponsorship. That's my only point.

AbnRanger
04-07-2007, 06:00 PM
Don't cry when the ME is selling its oil at $300 a barrel when it will be supplying most of the worlds remaining conventional oil. They'll be milking all of us that don't have a choice like adobe is doing now - but they'll still be giving the stuff away at home.

If they overplay their hand, they will find themselves eating sand'wiches, literally...for dinner every night, and will have to figure out a way to include crude into their diet. They'll need to.

Here in the U.S. there is an ever-growing demand and capacity for bio-fuels...a replenishable supply...not so with crude. The only reason bio-fuel production hasn't kicked into high gear is because until recently, crude was still the cheapest. As the prices of crude go up, so does the introduction and production of bio-fuels.

So, if Iran's leader (and others in the Middle East) want to get crazy, and try to hold us economically hostage they way he did the 15 British Marines and Sailors...thinking we will pay extortion rates for crude, they are in for a very rude awakening.

At least one thing conservatives and liberals here can both agree on, is our utter need to rid ourselves of dependence on foreign oil...especially in the aftermath of 9/11 and when we have an abundant capacity to do so.
If needed, we can start mass-producing (on a much larger scale than we currently do) bio fuel alternatives almost overnight. Enough for us, and our allies. I believe it's Argentina that is already there.

So, back on topic:
We too have plenty of software options, and if Adobe keeps this up, the market will answer back. Plus piracy will become an ever-increasing problem for them, just like it has the music industry.

T-Light
04-07-2007, 07:43 PM
Keep an eye on the open source cinepaint (filmgimp), it's 8,16 & 32 bit. I seem to remember this going through a rough patch a few years ago but it appears they've started work on it again. This from their site...


Film Gimp, the original CinePaint architecture, first released in 2002. Glasgow, a new architecture, is the next generation of CinePaint. Glasgow 0.1 released onWinXP on Dec 22nd, 2006. It's very alpha. You can't do real work with it yet, but shows progress. At this time both Film Gimp and Glasgow are continuing in development. The target date for the first Linux release of Glasgow is February 10th.

They also say (again from their site)...

In our primary market, the film industry, our position is #2 and Adobe Photoshop is #1.

Fighting talk :thumbsup:

http://www.cinepaint.org/

cresshead
04-07-2007, 07:58 PM
keep your photoshop and add this
http://www.electriciris.com/

starbase1
04-08-2007, 02:56 AM
Wow, are you kidding? That means you can't even open HDRs much less edit them. I don't know anybody that wouldn't hate being stuck in an 8-bit world.

8 bit depth maps and height maps kill it for me - 16 bit gray scape is very useful.

starbase1
04-08-2007, 02:59 AM
If you feel being ripped off by Adobe try The GIMP (make your money talk), if this program doesn't have what you need maybe if you ask nicely they will work on it, or even better try a sponsorship. That's my only point.

Actually if I believed in strong karma (my name is Nick!), I'd steal PS and send the cheque I would have spent to the guys working on Gimp...

Just trying to be a better person!

3DBob
04-08-2007, 05:08 AM
ON TOPIC

I agree with Neverko, the electric iris product is terrible and crashes on relatively small meshes. It has a long way to go before it is useful.... Hexagon 2.1 at less than $100 is a far superior product that allows displacement painting as well. Of course ZBrush 3 will be the best.

GIMP sadly has a long way to go to be as user friendly (excluding cost however) IMHO.

16 bit for Displacements is soooo important. Though there are methods to split the export from apps to such as ZB into two 8 bit maps that can then be built into a node tree - not tried it myself though.

OFF TOPIC

AbnRanger

Sadly Biofuels is not the universal panecea it is being made out to be. here are just a few reasons.

- To fill a typical tank of a 4X4 like a RangeRover, it takes the equivalent amount of land area as would be needed to grow food enough for 1 person year. So if someone were to fill their car once a week, they would be driving the equivalent of 52 peoples food for a year in a year. This shows the conflict between people eating and others using biofuels. Already the very limited use of corn for biofuel production in the US has forced the price up so high that there have been food riots in Mexico.

- Oil is used extensively in modern agriculture and in fact created the agricultural revolution that feeds the worlds population. It is only through the use of oil-derived pesticides, herbicides, fertilisers, mechanised farming - processing and transportation that we can achieve the yields we currently do. It has been shown that American Corn derived biofuel produces 20% less energy than the oil that has been used in its production - this is not a solution.

- To meet the EUs target of just 5% biofuel the UK would need to use - 1. all of the 750,000 acres of set-aside land planted with oilseed rape to produce the bio-desel (land that supports insects and wildlife food chains). 2. The 3.5 million tonnes of feed wheat that is currently surplus to requirements and has to be exported will account for the bio-ethanol (national farming unions figures). That is wonderful, 3.5 million tonnes of grain that can go to feed people - squandered.

For the UK that means that we would need 20 times our available arable land just to provide the fuel to drive our vehicles. This is clearly not an option.

If the US were to replace its carbon use with nuclear power it would require 1000 of the biggest Nuclear powerstations ever built. And there is only enough Uranium in the world to power the current installations for another 50 years.

Brazil is the biggest user of biofuels - it uses 24% ethanol in 76% gasoline and to do so it has created monoculture fields of sugar can the size of Germany. Creating biofuel for the US would require wholesale destruction of the Amazon and remaining Brazilian plains. Brazil used 45,000 km² in 2000 to effectively power just 10million cars.

To power just the USs 231million cars this would require over 10million km² of land in the tropics - Brazils TOTAL land area is 8,511,965 km² - Not an option.

By 2025 the ME will be supplying up to 75% of conventional oil and shortly (human life scale) after this the world will be very close to running out (it will never run out completely - but a trickle of a few 100,000s bpd is pretty useless)

At this time the population will be 8 billion - China will have 160million more cars and India 70 milion more - their combined total 280 million rising to 550million by 2035.

Without oil fueled agriculture and living, the world can only naturally support 2 billion people - who post 2035 when the population will be nearly 10 billion, is going to cull the extra 8 billion?

3DBob

T-Light
04-08-2007, 07:06 AM
We could all just 'get on our bikes'.

Titus
04-08-2007, 08:35 AM
Actually if I believed in strong karma (my name is Nick!), I'd steal PS and send the cheque I would have spent to the guys working on Gimp...

Just trying to be a better person!

There should be some way to convince a computer science student to participate in the next google summer of code and do this for us.

prospector
04-08-2007, 09:21 AM
who post 2035 when the population will be nearly 10 billion, is going to cull the extra 8 billion?

I volunteer :D

Titus
04-08-2007, 12:02 PM
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/05/pay_twice_you_wish/

PS CS3 upgrade for US customers: $471.90 with Californian sales tax

PS CS3 upgrade for UK customers: £546.38, equivalent to $1080.31!!!



We love to be ripped off in the UK....

I'm gonna change my discussion here. According to my highschool burgernomics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_index) if we take the exchange rate for the GBP 0.5 (taken from xe.com and rounded) the Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) indicates a price of £546.38 for Photoshop in the UK is a little overvaluated (%15) compared to the cost of $471.90 in the USA.

More on burgernomics (http://econblog.aplia.com/2006/06/itunes-index-for-exchange-rates_16.html).

T-Light
04-08-2007, 08:11 PM
My Mom lives by Burgernomics (although I've never actually heard the term).
I don't.

A burgers price depends very much on local supply/demand/cost of production/taxes and percentage of profit etc. However...

An electronic download of software X, made in say Wyoming, doesn't cost anymore to distribute to their download customers in Wyoming as it does to their customers in Utah, Washington, Kentucky, Canada, Mexico, Greenland, Siberia, Japan or any other country on this little blue planet.

To charge other customers around the world more money just because those customers aren't protected by trade laws for this kind of thing is absolutely despicable.

I won't be buying anything from Adobe or other like minded companies until this is addressed.

ps Did I mention I signed the petition :thumbsup:

Titus
04-08-2007, 09:27 PM
To charge other customers around the world more money just because those customers aren't protected by trade laws for this kind of thing is absolutely despicable.


Actually, according to my burgernomics Adobe is charching almost the same, aprox %15 more. This product doesn't have the same price but it requires you the same amount of work to buy it in the UK than in the US, this is what the PPP says.

chikega
04-08-2007, 10:10 PM
http://kanzelsberger.com

photoshop for 38 bucks.

:)

mlon

I've given up on Adobe as well .... this is a very close Photoshop replacement with versions for Win, Linux, OS X, and even Zeta (BeOS) ... how 'bout that!

and it handles HDR .. NICE!

http://www.kanzelsberger.com/img/osx.png

T-Light
04-09-2007, 05:15 PM
Titus -

Actually, according to my burgernomics Adobe is charching almost the same, aprox %15 more. This product doesn't have the same price but it requires you the same amount of work to buy it in the UK than in the US, this is what the PPP says.
But that would suggest that people in the UK make double the hourly rate of those in the US. Unfortunately, that isn't the case. When the British government claims people in the UK make an average of £35,000 or $70,000 per annum, it's just marketing hype. Every country does this of course. It only takes one person earning £1,000,000 a year to raise 100 peoples average income by £10,000. Even going back a few years we had over 50,000 millionaires.

There's an awfull lot of people in the UK making only about £7,500 a year (before tax!). Which makes it doubly annoying that Mr Adobe believes He deserves one 1/15th of their annual wage rather than usual 1/30th he demands off a US citizen.

jasonwestmas
04-09-2007, 06:02 PM
I love the underdogs, go get em guys.

achrystie
04-09-2007, 06:19 PM
Titus -

But that would suggest that people in the UK make double the hourly rate of those in the US. Unfortunately, that isn't the case. When the British government claims people in the UK make an average of £35,000 or $70,000 per annum, it's just marketing hype. Every country does this of course. It only takes one person earning £1,000,000 a year to raise 100 peoples average income by £10,000. Even going back a few years we had over 50,000 millionaires.

There's an awfull lot of people in the UK making only about £7,500 a year (before tax!). Which makes it doubly annoying that Mr Adobe believes He deserves one 1/15th of their annual wage rather than usual 1/30th he demands off a US citizen.

Contrary to popular belief of people in the UK, there are also a significant number people in the US that make "well under" the average income level as well and make as little as $14000 a year or less.

So the point here is?
That's the whole idea behind "averages".

The bottom line is, the loaf of bread that costs $2 in America costs 2 pounds in the UK. Consider yourself lucky that if you come to America on vacation you get to eat cheap by only spending 1 pound on your loaf of bread, whereas if I visit the UK, I get the pleasure of paying $4 for my loaf of bread, which would be consistently well beyond my means if done repeatedly.

Look at it from this perspective, for the same job, and same qualifications, in any "professional" career if I were to move to the UK and do the same job, I'd make equivalent pound pay, not "half salary" because of the exchange rate. The same would be true if you moved to the US. A $35000 salary is roughly equivalent to a 35000 pound salary, exchange rate has close to zero effect on salary vs. cost of living.

Now that said, if you want to argue that Photoshop is one of the single most overprice products "in general", and that Adobe should lower it's pricing structure, I'd more than happy to support that idea. :)
Adobe has been overcharging as the market leader for WAY too long.

My advice, don't buy it, and use a competitive product or one of the free alternatives. If everyone did that, eventually, the pricing would go down.

T-Light
04-09-2007, 06:22 PM
Adobe Photoshop Elements, Has anyone mentioned this yet?

US price for Elements+Premier Elements $159
UK price for Elements+Premier Elements £79.94

Nothing to complain about there, AND there boxed AND they've had to be shipped from the States.

So what's going on?

T-Light
04-09-2007, 06:38 PM
achrystie -

the loaf of bread that costs $2 in America costs 2 pounds in the UK. Consider yourself lucky that if you come to America on vacation you get to eat cheap by only spending 1 pound on your loaf of bread, whereas if I visit the UK, I get the pleasure of paying $4 for my loaf of bread,Where on Earth have you been shopping?, whatever you do, don't go back :D

A decent loaf of bread's only about 80-90p in the UK :)

achrystie
04-09-2007, 06:56 PM
achrystie -
Where on Earth have you been shopping?, whatever you do, don't go back :D

A decent loaf of bread's only about 80-90p in the UK :)


Well, I can buy cheaper bread here too...but in that case we need to define "decent". :D

To be honest, I buy the cheapest loaf available, which leaves me with a store brand white or wheat bread, typically around $0.89-$1.09.

T-Light
04-09-2007, 07:05 PM
I think we're on about a par :)
The larger chains unbranded type bread is probably about 50-60p. Hovis or Kingsmill might be about 95p ish. Bit embarrasing there as I don't do the shopping. Her indoors would never let me loose in Tesco's with the weekly food money, I'd more than likely walk out with two tins of beans and a basket of DVD's :D

T-Light
04-09-2007, 07:39 PM
Ok then, going by Burgernomics :)

How much does McDonalds charge in different countries for their base cheese burger. This is the very basic one, not the double cheesburger or the quarter pounder. It should be the cheapest on the menu.

UK=60p or approx $1.20 :)

nemac4
04-09-2007, 08:15 PM
http://kanzelsberger.com

photoshop for 38 bucks.

:)

mlon

Wow,.. this looks great. I'll give it a try.:beerchug:

AbnRanger
04-09-2007, 09:16 PM
Sadly Biofuels is not the universal panecea it is being made out to be. here are just a few reasons.

- To fill a typical tank of a 4X4 like a RangeRover, it takes the equivalent amount of land area as would be needed to grow food enough for 1 person year. So if someone were to fill their car once a week, they would be driving the equivalent of 52 peoples food for a year in a year. This shows the conflict between people eating and others using biofuels. Already the very limited use of corn for biofuel production in the US has forced the price up so high that there have been food riots in Mexico.

- Oil is used extensively in modern agriculture and in fact created the agricultural revolution that feeds the worlds population. It is only through the use of oil-derived pesticides, herbicides, fertilisers, mechanised farming - processing and transportation that we can achieve the yields we currently do. It has been shown that American Corn derived biofuel produces 20% less energy than the oil that has been used in its production - this is not a solution.
Well, here in the US, there are PLENTY of wide-open spaces that can be rather quickly turned into vast corn fields. And it's not just corn...there's a host of other sources that can and are being used to make Ethanol (which is usually then blended with petrol) or Bio-diesel. So, it's not simply about corn.

Just as the Internet (after Al Gore invented it) didn't catch on literally overnight (but pretty darned close). Same thing goes with alternative fuels. It's catching on about the same pace as the web did in the mid 90's, and we have high gas prices to thank for "Fueling (pun intended) that fire."
The more we produce, the more we can rely strictly on our own resources for crude/petroleum. I was watching the evening news today and they were talking about this very thing, and how more and more farmers are sewing corn TO KEEP UP WITH THE DEMAND. If it's so inefficient as you say...obvious someone needs to share your statistics with them and our government...because they are no where near as pesimistic about it as you are. On the contrary, our country is investing in it heavily.

President Bush made a recent trip to South American and Central American countries to lobby for cooperation and new partnerships for this very effort. I wish you would have spoken up earlier, I could have called the President on his cell phone and told him to forget the whole thing...3D Bob said it's a lost cause...save yourself a trip and save the taxpayers some money in the process. :D

T-Light
04-09-2007, 09:47 PM
Funny you should mention this tonight, but a US news show has just been on and they said the opposite. They said so many farmers are moving to fuel crops that dairy farmers are paying double for cattle food - so milk is going to double in price and bread is going to double price (limited wheat), and things only look like they're going to get worse.

So when you look at it this way, in the US, the cost of bread is going to rocket, the cost of meat is going to rocket, which means the cost of burgers are going to rocket.

If this is all true it means burgernomics will go into reversal and we in Europe may be paying only half the price for photoshop as you all are in America.

Hands up who think I'm being naive :D

Titus
04-09-2007, 10:33 PM
Ok then, going by Burgernomics :)

How much does McDonalds charge in different countries for their base cheese burger. This is the very basic one, not the double cheesburger or the quarter pounder. It should be the cheapest on the menu.

UK=60p or approx $1.20 :)

Use the Big Mac index, it's the base for the burgernomics. There's also info for songs in iTunes :).

In Mexico a happy meal goes for $3 USD

DaveW
04-10-2007, 01:33 AM
Ok, three responses:

1. The price gouging sucks. I still don't think there's a really good, integrated competitor though. Corel was hot stuff in the late 90's but Photopaint, their Photoshop competitor, has barely been touched over the last 7 years. New icons don't count as an upgrade in my book. I switched back to Photoshop about two years ago because I couldn't figure out what I was paying for. Painter on the other hand is definately a well done app. And Paint Shop Pro, now owned by Corel, looks like a decent competitor as well. Maybe if they can get their act together, throw in a good video editor, compositor and, dare I dream, a competitor to Flash (why did they ditch RAVE? So much potential down the toilet). They briefly made Linux versions of some of their software. If only they continued down that path.

2. Flash CS3 is a major upgrade. AS 3 is a vast improvement over AS1 and 2 in terms of speed and memory efficiency. The new components are a lot better too. There is now a much improved psd and ai importer, and the interface improvements and consistency across all CS3 apps is a nice bonus. I wish they had added some more animation features though, and fixed some bugs with the drawing engine.

3. It doesn't take the landmass/food to feed a person for 1 year to fill one tank of ethanol. It takes the landmass/food to feed a person for 1 year to power a car for one year. That's also assuming you're only using corn. Sugar cane is more efficient ethanol producer, as are sugar beets, sweet potatoes, sorghum, switchgrass, and there are hardier yeasts being developed that will allow for cheaper and more efficient alcohol production. Genetically engineered crops could also produce more starchy crops and more crops per acre. You can also make your own ethanol with leftover kitchen scraps, not enough to be self sufficient but enough to keep your fuel costs a little lower. There are companies that create ethanol from food that's past the expiration date. Also, if engines were designed to use only ethanol and not gasoline the efficiency goes up quite a bit because ethanol can burn at higher compression ratios than gasoline. All that said, ethanol alone can't replace gasoline or petroleum, and electric cars are far cheaper to run (much cheaper than gasoline too) and are far cleaner, even considering that in the US coal is the number 1 source of electricity. It's even cleaner in places like Canada that use mostly hydroelectric power. There was a battery company that recently created a new type of car battery that has vastly improved storage and discharge than current battery technology...unfortunately they were bought by Texaco. So it'll probably never see the light of day, but one can hope.

3DBob
04-10-2007, 06:42 AM
DaveW / AbnRanger,

I tried to use very public and factual figures in my arguments not hearsay and supposition.

Bush visit Brazils president to sign an accord on creating a Biofuel market and to encourage its expansion, the reasons are this:-

Brazil has been producing and using ethanol for over 30 years and it powers nearly one quarter of its transportation - Its one of the most NATURALLY (ie without oil based support) productive growing areas on earth - It is also a massive country - almost the same size as US.

In 30 years the best Brazil has managed to achieve is 45000 km2 powering just 10million cars.

In 2002 the US had less than 940 million acres (3.8 million km2 of farmland) 2/3rds of which is devoted to livestock - leaving 1.27 million km2 of farmland for food crops. Ignoring the fact that the US recieves vastly less solar radiation per hectare, has fewer/shorter growing seasons and average American cars are larger than Brazilian ones - if all current US crop land was put over to growing biofuel and you achieved the same productivity as Brazil, then you could power 281 million cars.

However we know Americans have not tended towards thifty vehicles and there is still haulage and other forms of vehicles to power. Add to this that all of the vehicles would require massive amounts of energy to be converted to run on new fuels, the processing plants built and that approx. 1/3 more oil is used in industry, aviation and other uses other than transport, the land use would need to be far higher.

With all these factors weighed up (this is my opinion not fact like other things presented here) I would expect nearly all of the USs agricultural land to be converted if it is to become self sufficient in OIL replacements for transport.

Of course, if Americans are happy not to eat, then technically - you could replace your transportation needs - but there would be little feedstock for Phamaceuticles or plastics, so assuming you don't need any medication or shiny new laptops either - then yes its all possible.

This is Why Bush went to Brazil - not to save the earth - but because it is the only option. It is a pre-emptive strike using capitalist mechnisms to grab a stake in the last greatest potential growing place on earth - The Amazon and the remaining South American savannahs.

Bush is canny - I hope our grandchildren are proud of us when they find out we let this happen.

3DBob

bobakabob
04-10-2007, 06:44 AM
Wavk,

Thanks for the heads up on Pixel... I've been looking for a cheap HDR editor. And this comes with Photoshop bolted on :)

Agree with all the comments. Adobe Photoshop in the UK is ridiculously expensive. Elements I've found to be too 'clunky', the new interface is awful and the Curves control is now restricted. OK Adobe are considered industry standard but snob value aside there are plenty of sound alternatives minus bells and whistles. The Gimp has all the essential basics.

cresshead
04-10-2007, 09:18 AM
which version of elements is 'cluncky' and was a previous version actually a better option to buy?

is adobe photoshop elements now crippleware?

re pixels:- looks okay there's not huge lib of brushes but most other things look okay for basic photoshop needs..i'll have a play with the demo

i currently still use photoshop5 le...it's getting old though!:D

jasonwestmas
04-10-2007, 09:43 AM
which version of elements is 'cluncky' and was a previous version actually a better option to buy?

is adobe photoshop elements now crippleware?

re pixels:- looks okay there's not huge lib of brushes but most other things look okay for basic photoshop needs..i'll have a play with the demo

i currently still use photoshop5 le...it's getting old though!:D

Yeah, I wouldn't count on pixel to be a painting app like PS can be. I would get Pixel just so I can do Image editing. I have my own painting apps already and they don't have an image editor. You see the connection. . .

cresshead
04-10-2007, 09:54 AM
yeah...that's what i use tvpaint for....painting!
some of the image filters seem to have no preview..still it's a beta.
will continue to have a play...tis V affordable!

jasonwestmas
04-10-2007, 10:09 AM
Oh and don't forget about the GIMP for image editing. Cheap, cheap and good.

Dodgy
04-10-2007, 10:51 AM
If anyone out there is using PS elements, can they tell me if you can set the flow/opacity of a brush to be tablet sensitive? I bought PSE1 and got stung because only the size was pressure sensitive, not opacity, and I hadly ever use the size sensitivity in PS full...

IgnusFast
04-10-2007, 11:36 AM
I've given up on Adobe as well .... this is a very close Photoshop replacement with versions for Win, Linux, OS X, and even Zeta (BeOS) ... how 'bout that!

and it handles HDR .. NICE!


I like what it can do, but at least for the windows version, it's EXTREMELY buggy. As in, even resizing the window can cause it to crash! And you apparently have to use the brush tools with the image scaled to 100% or the feedback doesn't work right at all.

Love the brush tools, though - it falls somewhere between Photoshop and Painter. Gonna try it on the Mac before I reg it, though... The windows version just has too many problems.

mattclary
04-10-2007, 12:13 PM
Economics dictate that a product will cost more in a location if it costs more to transport that product to said location.

We live in the Data Age. It will cost Adobe no more to transport those bits to the U.K. than it does to transport them to Los Angeles. I'm not one to scream "Greed!", but this is a case of greed, pure and simple.

I'm just confused as to why Adobe has singled out specific countries instead of raising the price for everyone. Raise it $10 in the states and make that the price everywhere (adjusted for exchange rates), and they will probably make as much or more money without having to defend their questionable pricing policies.

3DBob
04-10-2007, 12:24 PM
Just ordered ZBrush2 with free 3 upgrade - just 4.67% difference between £ and Dollar - what is more - if you want to pay in dollars - you can! Brilliant....

This is a fair company that does not have a monopoly to milk - that is of course until Pixologic is bought by Adobe - or Adobe buys one of its competitors and destroys ZB market with an inferior product.

3DBob

cresshead
04-10-2007, 12:25 PM
not one to jump to adobe's defence but anyone here heard of ''market forces''

if the market can sustain a higher price then the manufacturer will most often put that higher price n their products...photoshop dominates the pixel pushing computer applications, you simply can't deny it and if the u.k. can support higher pricing then adobe would be dumb not to go for that seeing as the company was set up not to be a charity but at profit making concern.

saying that photoshop cost 'no more' to sell to the uk market than the usa as an example is totally ridiculas....how would a visit to a usa college by adobe help it get it installed in uk colleges?.....how would a usa magazine advert campaign get sales in the uk?

marketing plays a huge part and yeah before you jump down my throat on this...yes the internet/webpages can be pretty cheap to adapt to other countries...but then there's localisation for french, spanish, italian etc versions of photoshop the manuals, pdf manual need to be converted...
then there's import tax to pay for a usa product being imported into the uk for example...

i know it's not 'fair' in your eyes but hey you have the ''choice'' not to buy it as well ya know!

AbnRanger
04-10-2007, 01:12 PM
This is Why Bush went to Brazil - not to save the earth - but because it is the only option. It is a pre-emptive strike using capitalist mechnisms to grab a stake in the last greatest potential growing place on earth - The Amazon and the remaining South American savannahs.

Bush is canny - I hope our grandchildren are proud of us when they find out we let this happen.

3DBob I think you are missing the point. What I'm talking about is reducing the amount of dependency on foreign sources of petroleum...to the degree that it's more costly to the Middle-Eastern countries who attempt to hold the rest of the world "Hostage"...kind of what Psyco-Midget, Achmed-whocares-ajab, in Iran is trying to do.
We used to produce, what was it...40-60% of our own oil, and if "tree-huggers" would get out of the way, that percentage would go higher. Nevertheless, the aim is to reach a point, not where we don't need petroleum at all, but that we don't have to rely so heavily upon resources from foreign countries....many of which hate us...in order to make up the difference from what we produce ourselves.

In light of that, it is certainly do-able. With regard to increased corn production making other food commodities higher...the sky is not going to fall, and the market will work itself out...always has, always will.

Think about all the inventions and innovations we benefit from today...How many of those do you suppose went un-opposed by naysayers...much like yourself. I'm quite certain those detractors had their "figures/statistics" as well, aye?
I'm also certain that our public officials are privvy to statistics" as well. After all, that's their job. I doubt they just loaf about their daily duties until they catch the evening news and hear some cynic's viewpoint, and think, "Holey Swiss Cheese, we had better stop this blasphemy, and go bow before the Oil Wells (in the Venezuala and the Middle East) lest we anger them further."

cresshead
04-10-2007, 01:17 PM
er.... is their a petrol thread somewhere!.....

this thread is called '' Photoshop rip off....'':D :thumbsup:

AbnRanger
04-10-2007, 01:23 PM
Yes...it analogous to Adobe's pricing. The point being, we have options.
I'm not sure how "Chips" had anything to do the "Freelance Rates" thread either, but at least there's a parallel here.

cresshead
04-10-2007, 01:34 PM
:compbeati :stumped: :argue: :cursin:

:bowdown:

:agree:

mattclary
04-10-2007, 01:45 PM
if the market can sustain a higher price then the manufacturer will most often put that higher price n their products...photoshop dominates the pixel pushing computer applications

They don't doiminate, that would be an understatement. In todays world, how can the UK market for software really be differentiated from the US market? It's not like they have to spend more to ship the bits.

What is it about the UK market that allows the higher price? Lack of competition?

My personal observations (and I could be wrong on this) is that Europeans are less inclined to use "off brands". They want to stick with Intel, MicroSoft, Adobe, etc... rather than try Jasc, AMD, etc...

I helped a French-Moroccan co-worker order some parts for his brother a few years back. At the time, AMD was a better value for the money, but he said his brother was really hung up on wanting Intel. He indicated to me that seemed to be the prevailing opinion in the area.

I wonder if this is the case here. Does Adobe know that Europeans are going to buy their product no matter how ludicrous the price?

3DBob
04-10-2007, 02:33 PM
This is on-topic - it is all one-big analogy....

I'm not a cynic I am a realist. The figures I use are available on Wiki - The main thread of my arguments are based on facts which I have detailed.

I am also pro-active, examples are I will be launching a site in the coming year www.homosymbion.com, which will detail the best ways to lower ones energy footprint based on a wiki engine with globally challenged facts, figures, alternatives.

I am also going to produce a cartoon series that educates children about alternative energies - character & series concept design is complete with example animations and I aim to present it here

http://www.aspo-global.org/aspo6/

and try and seek funding for something that will benefit all our offspring. You can see an example of my throrough research here (seventh from left)

http://www.theaircar.com/niza05uk.html

where I met a lead engine designer from Tata motors that is determined that as India moves from 1million cars to 100s millions, that only a few of them will be petrol powered - (note Indian company buying leading German wind turbine manufacturer today). I met a leading venezuelan minister for oil, 2 of the leading tzars of VC companies investing in Fuel cells etc etc......

The simple fact is that no one alive today has experienced a world where there hasn't been an increasing supply of cheap energy year on year available. No sizeable economy in the last 100 years has grown without increasing their energy use - there is a direct correlation - this is why Bush cannot believe an economy can be successful if asked to reduce energy use - he is right, it hasn't. In my lifetime I will see the end of the age of oil - the end of gas and if many more Nuclear power stations are built - the end of Uranium fuelled fission (note: must stop anyone building nuclear powerstations). Granted - there is 100s of years of coal left - but at what cost?

Moving towards alternative fuels is not only commendable but necessary - only by doing this will we be able to exert influence over those that would otherwise extort huge wads of cash from our citizens. It creates a competitive option - kinda like AMD.

The problem with Adobe at the moment is that capitalist legilators are inneffectual (I believe through ignorance and the law lag for fast moving software) hihstorically at stopping software companies from forming monopolies and as a result Adobe has no real competition now in its main markets (web / photo editing / design). That would be fine by me if they treated us all the same, but they don't - Adobe customers worldwide need the AMD / Biofuel type REAL alternatives or they need to be broken up.

3DBob

3DBob
04-10-2007, 02:45 PM
I just looked at the air car site, looks like Tata motors have signed up to co-develop and financially support the air engine development - sounds like that guy was true to his word.

India really is stealing a march on the rest of the world with this one..... good on them this is a mind bending technology.

I might have to edit the high-def footage I recorded on the day now that I have speed edit, the footage includes a fully working van powered by the air engine.

3DBob

Wonderpup
04-10-2007, 04:51 PM
Adobe are free to charge whatever they like, of course.

I think what people find objectionable about the situation is the fact that adobe are in effect 'rigging the market' by taking active steps to prevent people from buying their product directly at lower prices- I can buy all sorts of things from all over the planet- but when it comes to adobe products I am actively prevented from doing so- they even control amazon to prevent them doing so- this is something new, something arising from the nature of internet commerce.

Corporations like coca cola don't spend millions on branding for fun- they understand that the true value of their product lies in it's brand value- other than that it's just another bottle of fizzy sugerwater.

Adobe in my opinion , are in danger of squandering a tremendously positive brand image by employing tactics that just seem unfair and expoitative- whatever the actual reason.

Sarford
04-10-2007, 05:21 PM
2. Flash CS3 is a major upgrade. AS 3 is a vast improvement over AS1 and 2 in terms of speed and memory efficiency. The new components are a lot better too. There is now a much improved psd and ai importer, and the interface improvements and consistency across all CS3 apps is a nice bonus. I wish they had added some more animation features though, and fixed some bugs with the drawing engine.

AS3 is very nice ofcourse but it has been in development by Macromedia for years so Adobe did nothing there.
Adobe bought the app and all they did with it was add an importer for their main apps. This defenitly is not a major update. This update clearly shows that macromedia had the vision and adobe doesn't, wich is a real shame in my eyes couse I'm an absolute major huge big fan and user of flash.

DaveW
04-10-2007, 06:05 PM
Sorry Cresshead :D

3DBob
Brazil used to run almost 100% on ethanol, though I don't know what the number of cars they were using at the time was...significantly fewer than now no doubt. The late 80's is when they started using gasoline on a larger scale as they were wealthy enough at that point to start importing it. Also keep in mind that they don't create their ethanol with crops specifically grown for ethanol, it's a byproduct of their sugar exports. A lot could be done to make ethanol a viable alternative, it's just that gasoline is so much cheaper and generates more energy than ethanol. I'm not pulling any numbers out of my *** either, I have an ethanol powered truck and I've done a fair bit of research on the subject :) Take a look at this link, and pay particular attention to the gallons per acre chart near the bottom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel
And that is just with current technology. Bioengineering can boost those numbers substantially...even good old fashioned selective breeding can probably make a big impact. A key factor is hardier yeast, which currently can only withstand about 12% alcohol before dying. There are scientists working on making yeast that can withstand nearly double that much alcohol which would significantly lower costs and energy consumption. Add to that crops with higher starch content, larger crop yeilds, more efficient extraction processes, and engines with higher compression ratios, you end up with a viable alternative to gasoline. We're not there yet, but that's because the research hasn't been considered necessary until relatively recently. You can't just write it off because our current methods of ethanol production are inadequate. If we had done that with other technology we'd be stuck in the stone age.

Do you happen to know the horsepower and torque ratings for those compressed air engines? I haven't looked into those in a few years, but as I recall they had pretty low power output compared to internal combustion engines. If they don't deliver the power I think that like electric cars they'll have a hard time catching on. Ethanol is something we can start gradually switching to almost immediately with little noticable effect...mainly higher fuel costs at the start, but that will decrease over time. Ethanol burns at a lower temperature than gasoline and puts less stress on the engine and doesn't require as many oil changes, so there will be some cost benefit from that, though not enough to entirely offset the initial higher fuel costs.

Oh yeah...um shame on Adobe :D

prospector
04-10-2007, 07:26 PM
OffTopic a little
Sorry 3DBob but it sounds like a politically correct project that doesn't tell the whole story or just pulls numbers out of thin air which means;

A. I am being forced to do something I don't want
B. Paying higher prices for stuff I don't want (higher car costs) or stuff I do want (sugar for my coffee or corn-on-the-cob or anything else that is for food but being used as fuel).

and most important which will NEVER die

C. a bigger government bureaucracy (and we all know there will be one) that I have to pay for.

Will all those costs be in your project so everyone can see the true costs?

Will raw product shipping costs from other countries to here be included?

Will alternate methods be included?

Will enviromentalist contradictions and ignorance (for lack of a better term) be included?
Like;
They want us less dependent on forign oil yet won't let us drill our own yet have no qualms about letting other countries drill off Florida.
Can't drill in Alaska because it may hurt reindeer yet it's shown that the previous Alaska drilling harms nothing.
Won't let citizens become either less dependent or completly independent on
home heating by going to woods and getting all the dead wood laying on ground to use for heating and or cooking, yet will let the same tinder grow and grow untill whole forests burn creating more smoke than would be made in someones fireplace.

Won't let hydro-electric dams go up because it might make the mountain rivers look un-natural even tho it brings in MORE money to state from sportsmen spending locally.

Would rather have windfarm taking up hundreds of acres of land (like east of LA) yet won't let someone put in a 20 foot square wellhead, even tho those hundreds of acres of windmills produce very little electric compared to hydro or using 25 acres for a Nuclear power plant that could power a whole city instead of a neighborhood.

Will all these things be included?

On Target a lot :hey:
And Adobe is just a product, no one twists arms to force anyone to buy it.
Price differences are here too for other stuff even in the same town. I can shop for food at my neighborhood store OR go to a less afluent part of town to the same store (like foodmax) and get the same items cheaper.
Am I getting ripped off? Don't think so.....it's what the market will bear.

prospector
04-10-2007, 08:39 PM
And I hope all grfx are done in LW and assembled on the VT or SE of course :D

3DBob
04-11-2007, 04:45 AM
Hi there....

DaveW,

You make some interesting points that support my argument around food security global equality... most notably on ethanol production.... from one of your Wiki citations:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel

this

"as of 2006, technology does not exist that makes it economically competitive to produce ethanol from the most promising crop: the cellulosic feedstock"

Read as...the 30% of Bagasse left over from crushing sugar cane that contains a lot of energy in celulose is not converted to Alchohol. It is in fact burnt to produce heat and power - much of which is used in processing the Sugar in the cane to alcohol. So far from using by-product - it uses the whole thing. I tried to ignore all this stuff when I quoted the Brazillian land use of Sugar cane to power x cars. ho hum.

Additionally it details this:-

"The United States Department of Energy, finds that for every unit of energy put towards ethanol production, 1.3 units are returned. Another study found that corn-grain ethanol produced 1.25 units of energy per unit put in."

and from here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagasse

"75% of the energy required to grow and move the sugar cane (including bagasse) is from liquid fuel (petroleum or hydrocarbon based), leading to a 25% net gain from photosynthesis"

these are two points that largely agree, the implications for this are interesting when compared to your request for me to look at yield figures. See yield is alcohol gallons per acre - however taking these energy balance equations into account gives this:-

Corn 370gal/acre * 0.25 (energy gain over fuel used in production) gives 92.5gal/acre

Cane 662 gal/acre * 0.3 (energy gain over fuel used in production) gives 198.6gal/acre.

Assuming someone does not eat too much meat, an acre of land is sufficient to feed them and the tank of a rangerover is approx 28 gallons.

On these figures land use for a little over 3 tanks of Corn derived and 7 tanks of cane derived alcohol would feed one person per year.

Not quite the environmentalists 1/1 doom figure - but even at the cane end of the scale, filling the RangeRover once a week would deny 7.42 people of food / year.

Multiply that by 115 million (I know not all of the USs 231million cars have 28 gallon tanks) and you end up with denying over 850 million people of food.

There are over 800million cars in the world today.

And again from your original citation

"One result of increased use of ethanol is increased demand for feedstocks. Large-scale production of agricultural alcohol may require substantial amounts of cultivable land with fertile soils and water. Clearance of new land often involves burning which can result in a very large emission of carbon dioxide. This may lead to environmental damage such as deforestation or decline of soil fertility due to reduction of organic matter"

--------------

On the air car, The inventor claimed that at 300 revs it produces the same torque as a mercedes at 3000 - something to do with compressed gas. Top speed is around 70mph. BHP is low - but the weight of the engine because it works at room and very low temperatures is around 70kgs(I could lift it).

The engine we saw was dual fuel compressed air and a hydrocarbon - that can be ethanol/petrol/deisel/oil/lpg/butane - it works by burning the fuel as a flame, slowly like in a domestic boiler - so it is very efficient and clean burning. The heat generated is used to force the expansion of the compressed air between cylinders. The engine has a starter motor that also acts as a compressor - so you can fill it up with compressed air at a filling station (2-3mins) or plug it into the domestic mains for 4 hours.

The engines can run in one of two modes with

Mono energy (zero emissions at car) - just compressed air, depending on model 100-300km

Bi-energy - Fuel + compressed air, depending on model 800-2000km

Emissions are 35g/km compared to a Range rovers 389g/km. Fuel for 800km is 1.7litres.

When i visited - there were Wind turbine engineers from spain that were looking to make wind turbines that compressed gas straight into tanks for load balancing and to provide stations to fill these vehicles. Micro solar, hydro, wind or CHP would be suitable for recharging these things at home with no grid power. Zero emmisions here we come.

Because the engines dont need to work at extreme temperatures they use much less metal in manufacture (far less embodied energy) - are far smaller so BHP goes a lot further and space in the car is massive for the size of the vehicle. The engine is about the same size as a lorry battery. The tecnology is scaleable - so imagine the power from a bigger engine. The guy who invented it has also made airplane and Formular 1 engines.

A benefit of low temperature is that they only need 1litre of vegetable derived lubrication oil every 30,000 miles. No special materials are used - the biggest problem with this car is that it will be very resistant to taxation and therefore is resented by western companies and governments. Also the inventor is being very restrictive with his licencing.

The major issue for the west is that India is focusing on LPG powered vehicle production now (peak for gas will be 25 years after oil) and then progress to aircar technology as TATA will have a stake in it. Imagine how much more competitive India will be when its 1 billion+ citizens have access to transport that does exactly what ours does in the west, but at $4500/vehicle, using 1/5 to 1/10th Fuel and 1/5 to 1/10th emissions.

Compare this to the fact that it takes 35000 miles worth of oil equivalent to extract and refine just the 2g of platinum required for a Hydrogen cars catalyst (UK governments figures) or that a hybrids Lithium (very limited global supplies) cells use 20-25000 miles of oil equivalent to extract and refine - there really is little effective competition.

-----------------------------------

Hi prospector,

You make very valid points, many of which I agree with.

On the subject of ANWAR the estimated potential projected recoverable oil of 16 billion barrels is about 3 years American useage. Just prolonging the innevitable. If I was running America - I'd use any argument necessary to NOT drill that oil until oil is at $300/barrel - don't make the mistake we made and burn our natural resources at $20-30/barrel to help out the rest of the world. They'll only throw it back at you.

With regard to homosymbion - the aim is to have a system that takes into account the TOTAL cost of ownership of a product - including environmental, social, resource use etc etc. Products will be placed into challenged league tables. Companies will be encouraged to submit products including such things as standby/on/load power useage for electrical items, raw material useage and manufacturing methods. People will be able to challenge a products credentials with facts and there will be moderators to ensure reliability. It will need a WIKI approach as the volume of work will be immense.

Way on topic......

You said that you get charged differing amounts for the same things from different stores - well that is the same thing here - the difference is I can go and buy those things at those different prices if I choose too - Adobe has created mechanisms that prevent us from having this same choice.

3DBob

T-Light
04-11-2007, 07:16 AM
3DBob
Thanks very much, I'm adding those links to my favourites :thumbsup:

Prospector
OT Green threads just wouldn't be the same without you :D :thumbsup:

Adobe
I'm still not buying your products.

3DBob
04-11-2007, 07:48 AM
T-Light

I'm forced to find a way of buying my upgrades from the US.

Prospector

I agree - i do like having Prospectors input on green issues.

3DBob
Get over yourself

3DBob

Verlon
04-11-2007, 08:08 AM
This portion of the post is on topic:

Speaking of upgrades...what has really been added to photoshop since version 7? I tried the Gimp, but didn't like it. I can't point to anything specific. Maybe there is subliminal advertising in my photoshop 7.

I can find photoshop CS3 for different prices by looking around. Adobe is TRYING to regulate it, but free market still works. Could it be that there is some British law that makes it easier for them to control the price?


This portion of the post is off topic... feel free to ignore it unless you are on the biofuel and burgernomics part of the discussion:

It seems to me that a lot of the statisitcs on global food, the environment, etc are skewed depending on who is doing the arguing.

Group 1) "We have to switch to bio-fuels as it is the most efficient renewable energy. This will decrease demand for petrol and make energy cheaper for the world. It will allow poor children that look pitiful on TV to have power in their hospitals. Read more at wemakemoneyfrombiofuels.com"

Group 2) "biofuels are not the answer. They are not as efficient and still produce greenhouse gasses. Ethanol is not as safe as gasoline because it carries oxygen and less energy per volume. Read more at wemakemoneyfromgasoline.com."

Group 3) "Solar and wind are the only the only infinitely renewable energy sources around. They're free! Switch to them. Read more at wemakemoneyfromsolar.com"

Group 4) "Ignore group 3, have you SEEN the list of toxic chemicals used to make a solar cell? They are horribly innefficient. Giant windmills are ugly and kill migrating birds. Read more giantlefthandedbigoilconspiracy.com

Group 5) Ignore all of the above, the earth can only feed and comfort 2-3 billion people. You need to slow down having babies if you want a decent life no matter how you slice it. Read more at wesellcontraceptives.com

President Bush) "Its a vast lef-wing conspir'cy wif nuke-u-lar implicon--impli--what was the question?

The truths are 1) EVERYTHING is poison and will kill you if you get too much (yes, everything. Yes Oxygen, too....water, too, and not by drowning...yes EVERYTHING).

2) Everybody is going to die evenetually, and something will kill them. Someone will be outraged by how some people die and they will research it and produce alarming looking numbers to show why we should ban anything that can cause people to die like that. They might well even believe in their cause.

3) every choice we make with regard to food, energy, the environment, and way of life will help some people and hurt others. Those choices will help some filthy rich, over-paid corporate entities and will hurt some other filthy rich overpaid corproate entities.

4) Since the common man seems to like people more than filthy rich overpaid corporate entities. Marketing for a given product will focus on the people it helps and the filthy over-paid corporate entity it hurts. Just understand that no matter which choice you make, someone is getting paid and someone is losing out.

5) If you let them, other people will make those choices for you. Those choices will probably not be in your best interests.

3DBob
04-11-2007, 08:50 AM
Verlon,

I agree with you that there has been little added to PS - but interoperability between Flash, Illustrator and PS is really important for me - I have workflow that is made redundant with CS3 - it is debatable if CS3 will save me much money though considering upgrade cost at even american levels.

Other topic....

I'm not making money from the air car, but I do think it has the most realistic chance of replacing petrol/deisel transportation.

Using 35g/km with in some cases less than 1/10th emissions has got to be less damaging and better for everyone than nearly 400g/km.

The problem is in the west we are getting very old and need a lot of tax revenue to pay for the elderly - this type of transport will not generate that Tax and so is not celebrated. We have also made our bed now.

India has nearly 40% under 15 years and the vast majority under 19 - and life expectancy is lower. They'll have a vast working population, vastly less energy use per head (especially with far better transport decisions) and far less elderly. Additionally literacy in Kerala for instance is 94.59 - This will make them extremely competitive.

To use an argument that equates to "everyone doing anything for whatever reasons has a cause and effect" does not invalidate the fact that there are better and less damaging ways of achieving the same goal.

I can achieve the same goal with my workarounds for features in CS3 but at what costs - If I buy it it will negate these workarounds - but I'll take a severe hit on my wallet. Knowing that these new workflow features are available cheaper to others when I have supported the components of the new Adobe for over a decade is just upsetting.

3DBob

Wonderpup
04-11-2007, 02:41 PM
Am I getting ripped off? Don't think so.....it's what the market will bear.

Only if the market itself is free- in this case adobe are creating a distorted market by preventing people from certain geographic regions buying at the lowest price- in the small town analogy it's like the price of haircut is different depending on what part of town you live in- this is not how business has ever been done- it creates bad feeling because it seems inherently unfair.

Titus
04-11-2007, 03:08 PM
Only if the market itself is free- in this case adobe are creating a distorted market by preventing people from certain geographic regions buying at the lowest price- in the small town analogy it's like the price of haircut is different depending on what part of town you live in- this is not how business has ever been done- it creates bad feeling because it seems inherently unfair.

In my mother's town (Santiago de Chile) the price of gas is different from place to place, usually a few cents more expensive where rich people lives. But again, is the same price for everybody realy fair? for me Phostoshop is way expensive than for people on the US and UK, even at the same price.

3DBob
04-12-2007, 06:45 AM
And so it continues....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6548107.stm

A huge swathe of virgin Ugandan hardwood forest is threatened by sugar plantation.

As more people think they are doing good by converting to biofuels - pushing up the global price of high calorie crops - rather than radically reducing their hydrocarbon consumption - expect more of the same.

Who cares? It's not in my back yard etc..... But it is our grandchildrens Planet.

Can someone confirm that you do not need to pay import duty on software - just VAT. Looks like I'll be taking a trip stateside.

3DBob

mattclary
04-12-2007, 07:23 AM
In my mother's town (Santiago de Chile) the price of gas is different from place to place, usually a few cents more expensive where rich people lives. But again, is the same price for everybody realy fair? for me Phostoshop is way expensive than for people on the US and UK, even at the same price.

Titus, there is more to consider with a physical product vs. data. With gasoline, it may be more expensive to get the gas to some locations because they are farther from the rail lines. Property in a wealthy area will be subject to higher property taxes, thus must charge more for the products they sell.

Also, poercentage wise, look at the disparity of the gas prices and the disparity of the Photoshop prices. I feel confident the difference in gas prices are not even close to the difference in prices Adobe is charging.

48%?

http://www.amanwithapencil.com/adobe.html

Titus
04-12-2007, 09:13 AM
For economics a product is a product, it doesn't matter if its made of wood or 0's and 1's. I'm most than convinced they are (as) fair charging differentiated prices for different markets just like any other company does (Coca Cola, McDonalds, Apple with iTunes, etc).

I think the price for a Photohop upgrade license is decent in Mexico (http://www.paguito.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.exe/online-store/scstore/c-ADOBE_LICENCIAS_PHOTOSHOP.html?E+scstore): MXP$1,416.14 (~ USD$130.00).

mattclary
04-12-2007, 10:28 AM
For economics a product is a product, it doesn't matter if its made of wood or 0's and 1's. I'm most than convinced they are (as) fair charging differentiated prices for different markets just like any other company does (Coca Cola, McDonalds, Apple with iTunes, etc).

I think the price for a Photohop upgrade license is decent in Mexico (http://www.paguito.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.exe/online-store/scstore/c-ADOBE_LICENCIAS_PHOTOSHOP.html?E+scstore): MXP$1,416.14 (~ USD$130.00).

Distribution of a product contributes to it's cost for the manufacturer, so yes, the type of product does matter a great deal in economics.

That point aside... Seriously? A 48% price difference? In a competitive market, that would never work.

T-Light
04-12-2007, 01:37 PM
Verlon -

Group 1) Read more at wemakemoneyfrombiofuels.com"

Group 2) Read more at wemakemoneyfromgasoline.com."

Group 3) wemakemoneyfromsolar.com"

Group 4) Read more giantlefthandedbigoilconspiracy.com

Group 5) Read more at wesellcontraceptives.com
Er, Ok, may I add one...
Verlon...

Group 6)varlons-sceptics-inc.com
:thumbsup: :D
they're not all bad :D
There's things we can all do to help that cost nothing, switching lightbulbs to energy saving for example. :)

3DBob
04-12-2007, 02:23 PM
Ok, So here is where I stand.

I actually own 1 copy of CS1 Premium and 1 Copy of Studio 8 and 1 copy of Photoshop 7

So I'll take Studio8 to CS3 Web Premium - what will it cost me:-

US Shop - US $499
UK Shop - UK £534.62

UK is 208% of the US cost - surely it can get worse?

I'll take my CS1 Premium to CS3 Design Premium, lets see now

US Shop - US $599
UK Shop - UK £703.82

UK is a spectacular 230% of the US cost OMG!

Maybe I can save some money by taking the CS1 Premium - Master Collection

US Shop - US $1999
UK Shop - UK $1902.32

Now that is better - Just 185% of the cost - sounds like a bargain.

For my Photoshop 7 to CS3 PSExtended

US Shop - US $349
UK Shop - UK £386.58

UK is 215% of the cost - about par.

So I've decided I'm going to get 1 Master collection and 1 CS3PSex. Should save over $2000

I need to come to San diego in the next couple of months - now I just need someone friendly to put me up there for a few days and to help order it.....

3DBob

Verlon
04-12-2007, 04:02 PM
Verlon -

Er, Ok, may I add one...
Verlon...

:thumbsup: :D
they're not all bad :D
There's things we can all do to help that cost nothing, switching lightbulbs to energy saving for example. :)


Its not that I think they are all bad. Its that there are consequences to every choice.

You decide to get a new washer for the wife, so you can't afford the new TV. Now you friend's all go to Bob's house to watch the game on his new TV. He ends up getting the promotion at work (better connected), but divorced becasue his wife can't stand those guys or something, and she really wanted the new washer. You toil away at the same job, but remain happily married.

Its the same with the environment. Gasoline is a REALLY good fuel source for cars. That's why it is so hard to replace. Hydrocarbons do suck though.

Now if I want to promote ethanol, should I focus on the hydrocarbons or the oil workers who will be unemployed if I have my way.....how their children will grow up in poverty and turn to a life of crime? Maybe I should focus on the farmland that is used for fueld instead of food now?

Should I focus on the added expense for dealing with alcohol fires because alcohol can burn more easily since it carries oxygen? Should I mention that it burns with a flame you can't see in sunlight so you don't know its on fire? Should I mention how much MORE you're going to need because it only carries about half the energy of gasoline? That its hard to start an alcohol car in cold weather, where cold is equal to about 60 F (Brazil ran into this)?

Or should I talk about how it renewable and doesn't poison the ground and kill plant life like some kind of botanical black plague?

No you go and try to make the best choice, but remember that SOMEONE has a vested interest in whatever choice you make, and it seems that it is easier to convince you to hate the other guy than to love my product.

So many people out there are peddling some kind of hate. When its not making money, its like the fast track to 15 minutes of fame.

Hate microsoft- monopolies suck!
Hate big oil - they holding back technology to screw the whole planet.
Hate meat eaters - they are cruel to animals
Hate PETA - they want to stop us from eating meat
Hate Adobe - they are ripping off the British (just so I can get on topic :) )
Hate rock and roll -- its the devil's music
Hate televangelists -- they're no better than rock stars

Now all those things might be true, but decide for yourself who you want to hate and why. Realize that you will have to pay the piper on that choice sooner or latter.

DaveW
04-13-2007, 01:25 AM
ok this is my last post on the subject this is getting way out of hand :)

1. The air engine sounds like it's gotten a lot better than the last time I looked into them. I was thinking electric is the best way to go but air engines are starting to sound pretty good. 70mph isn't going to impress anyone at the racetrack but it's great for city driving. I wonder if they'll be able to go head to head with combustion engines if they can manage to balance the size and weight of the air engines. Did the inventor say anything about how temperature affects performance? I would think cold climates would negatively impact the air pressure. Which brings up another question...how do passengers stay warm in cold climates?

2a. The byproduct I was speaking of was molasses, not bagasse...although that is burned to heat the stills. I watched a documentary about Brazil's agriculture and ethanol production was covered. They do have a small amount of land used entirely for ethanol production, but a great deal of their ethanol comes from the molasses that is leftover from the refinement process.

2b. The dept. of energy reports are again based on current technology (which is improving pretty quickly) and using corn (they're really pushing corn ethanol in the US for some reason). Using better crops combined with better yeast will improve those numbers quite a bit. I have read about experimental yeasts being developed in Canada that can withstand more than 12% alcohol, they're not available yet but it won't be much longer before they are. And as more research is done I'm confident that cellulosic ethanol will become economically feasible.

2c. The land to feed one person for a year, from a USDA report, was 8 or 9 acres (sorry my memory is fuzzy)...I guess that is including beef and dairy. Even as a vegetarian though, 1 acre is really pushing it considering that most people are not cultivating their own crops. Large scale farming requires more land per person. But if sorghum and switchgrass are used then it won't have to compete with food crops because they grow in land not suitable for food crops...and produce far more ethanol per acre than corn.

2d. I already said this but since somebody incorrectly stated that ethanol has half as much energy per gallon as gasoline I will repeat myself: First of all, it's 34% less engery, not 50%. Second, an engine with a higher compression ratio will have the same fuel economy as a gasoline engine so it balances out.

Anyways...this has been an interesting discussion and thanks for the info about the air engine 3DBob, it sounds like a really good solution. I was going to convert an old motorcycle to electric, but I think I'll take another look at compressed air, maybe I can make an air powered motorcycle instead :)

Ivan D. Young
04-13-2007, 02:15 AM
Adobe is really getting out of hand with all their crap! Will Rendition be just as expensive? Will Newtek release that part of LW to LW users to compliment Photoshop. And my vote on all this other stuff, GO HYDROGEN, Yes it is flammable, so what! Yes it is difficult to store, so was gasoline a long time ago, Yes it takes a lot of energy to produce, but really what does'nt anymore; and lastly it is the most abundant source of fuel in the UNIVERSE! The reason we don't have a lot of things in this day and age is that all of our societies have lost their nerve.

Wonderpup
04-13-2007, 03:39 AM
In my mother's town (Santiago de Chile) the price of gas is different from place to place, usually a few cents more expensive where rich people lives. But again, is the same price for everybody realy fair? for me Phostoshop is way expensive than for people on the US and UK, even at the same price.

But when your mother goes to buy gas, do they first ask her where she lives and then set the price accordingly? Would you consider it acceptable if they did?

It's not adobe's pricing I object to, it's the fact that they actively prevent me from shopping for the best price available that I object to- is my custom not as valid as a US customer- why should I be forced to pay more simply because I live outside the US? I'd happily pay additional shipping costs, but these price differentials go way beyond that.

Verlon
04-13-2007, 07:35 AM
What I have read is that you net about 50%. Either way there are host of issues to overcome with whatever fuel system you choose, including gasoline.

cresshead
04-13-2007, 08:32 AM
Ok, So here is where I stand.

I actually own 1 copy of CS1 Premium and 1 Copy of Studio 8 and 1 copy of Photoshop 7

So I'll take Studio8 to CS3 Web Premium - what will it cost me:-

US Shop - US $499
UK Shop - UK £534.62

UK is 208% of the US cost - surely it can get worse?

I'll take my CS1 Premium to CS3 Design Premium, lets see now

US Shop - US $599
UK Shop - UK £703.82

UK is a spectacular 230% of the US cost OMG!

Maybe I can save some money by taking the CS1 Premium - Master Collection

US Shop - US $1999
UK Shop - UK $1902.32

Now that is better - Just 185% of the cost - sounds like a bargain.

For my Photoshop 7 to CS3 PSExtended

US Shop - US $349
UK Shop - UK £386.58

UK is 215% of the cost - about par.

So I've decided I'm going to get 1 Master collection and 1 CS3PSex. Should save over $2000

I need to come to San diego in the next couple of months - now I just need someone friendly to put me up there for a few days and to help order it.....

3DBob


looks like adobe are paying for your holiday!:beerchug:
arn't adobe cool!...get you out the house and a free holiday!

R Haseltine
04-13-2007, 01:36 PM
Those UK prices include VAT by the look of it. If you buy in the US you are obliged to pay VAT on that (and some parts of the US have their own sales taxes) so to do a fair comparison you should look at the ex. VAT price (which is still a variable but hefty markup). The best deals, without a trip to the US, seem to be the individual products - upgrading PS, AI, ID and Acrobat costs a fair bit less than the Design Standard suite upgrade from a single application with the same contents (and you keep separate licences, though you may miss out on some extra fonts or other trimmings), while adding PSCS3 Ex and taking out Acrobat is only marginally more expensive than the standard suite.

Titus
04-13-2007, 01:39 PM
But when your mother goes to buy gas, do they first ask her where she lives and then set the price accordingly? Would you consider it acceptable if they did?

I could try to answer this but the subject got too boring to me, sorry but I'll stop to write on this thread.

Wonderpup
04-13-2007, 03:47 PM
I could try to answer this but the subject got too boring to me, sorry but I'll stop to write on this thread.

I'm always confused when people take the trouble to reply to a point by explaining they lack the interest to reply to a point- surely the time and effort required to explain why you're not replying is equivilent to the time and effort that would have been required to reply to the point in the first place?

prospector
04-13-2007, 04:01 PM
No not really.
taking time to actually respond means thinking time for the request/problem/statement.

As I am falling asleep here I can't even finish my thought. But suffice it to say, because your from the UK, I would have to charge you an exorbitant amount of shipping charges and vat tax for the answer, so really, I am saving you money by not answering. :D

cresshead
04-13-2007, 04:10 PM
this subject is giving me ''gas''....ha ha!

AbnRanger
04-13-2007, 08:27 PM
this subject is giving me ''gas''....ha ha!
Hey! Forget corn. There's your "Alternative Fuel" right there... :D

prospector
04-13-2007, 09:22 PM
Hey! Forget corn. There's your "Alternative Fuel" right there...

Yes Yesssss I can see it now

Overlay 70's wavy lines here

I can see the car seats now, screened tops, tubes running to the engine, car puttin down the road...but wait there is a backfire... :eek:
:D

Wonderpup
04-14-2007, 04:21 PM
No not really.
taking time to actually respond means thinking time for the request/problem/statement.



I could try to answer this but the subject got too boring to me, sorry but I'll stop to write on this thread.

cresshead
04-14-2007, 04:54 PM
nevermind..F prime....F power!....''runs'' on sprouts,beans and peas!