Drew, I agree with all that - added to which Bridge is also clunky and slows Photoshop. But I have to tell you, I went to a Lightroom Seminar yesterday afternoon here in Toronto given by Michael Reichmann - it was a three hour session on that program, and the program is GOOD. I'm on Windows so I can't use it yet, and it is still under development, but if you are on Mac, download it and try it. Miles ahead of Bridge, fast, easy, and it has some tools that are so cool they will probably end-up in future versions of Photoshop.
But on my second point, yes, that image you pointed me to is crystal clear - very good, no argument about it. But the question I was asking is different. If you were to re-rez the image in Photoshop (using the Image Size dialogue box, not Print with Preview) and then go back to the same file in its previous state and repeat the exercise in QImage, would one see a difference between the two full frame A4 prints with no further magnification? To put a finer point on it, I think if the term ever got into a dictionary, the dictionary definition of pixel-peeping would be where one is looking for differences between pixels under conditions that one would not normally look at the photographs. I don't look at photographs with a loupe or at 22x magnification. I just look at full photos, at normal viewing distance for the size of the image. So under these conditions, have you tested for and do you see an eye-popping difference between the same complete image (not a crop) at A3 or A4 size resampled with Photoshop "Image Size" tool versus resampled with QImage?