Hang on just a minute! Aren't we all supposed to be photographers first and not technicians, computer programmers, hackers or beta testers? Isn't the learning curve with any version of Photoshop steep enough without having to go through this nonsense just to get a successful installation of what is, after all, a very expensive product. I think you'd take a very dim view if you bought a new fridge and then were told you'd have to re-wire the house because the machine had a bug. Adobe should get real - consumers have rights and the fundamental right is that the produce works, first, last and always. We photographers are a forgiving lot.
When Adobe issued a free edition of Lightroom to previous Raw Shooter Premium users, we had another fiasco involving endless, fruitless calls to Adobe Customer Support et al. Two Adobe nightmares within a few months of each other is two too many. Apart from that, Lightroom is slow, and the sliders and both LR and CS3 seem very sluggish. In fact, everything seems sluggish and my hardware is as up to date as the next man's. My version of Bridge crashes quite often, my prints seem to have radically disimproved in both applications and I am now thinking of re-installing CS2 and using it exclusively.
Not a happy Adobe camper!
Seamus Finn
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=116936\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Seamus, as I made clear way-up in this thread, and lest anyone reading this forget or misundestand what I said, I write from a purely independent consumer perspective without regard to any software or hardware vendor, so I call a spade a spade, but that's from my own experience - readers will know that's all I usually discuss - and other peoples' experience and insight can and often does differ. That's the spice of life and so be it.
So with that disclaimer out of the way, I'll make a few observations on what you are saying:
(1) I'm using Windows XP on a Dell Precision 690 workstation with a 3 GHz Core Duo Xeon 5160, 32 bit mode and therefore 2GB of operational RAM. The two HDs working for Photoshop are 10,000 RPM units. I'm not having speed problems with Lightroom or Bridge, or CS3. I have both CS2 and CS3 in active use. I'd say CS2 Bridge loads a bit faster than CS3 Bridge, but CS3 Bridge is a different animal - it has capabilities that CS2 Bridge doesn't have. Maybe that extended functionality has a price in terms of slightly - and I mean slightly - longer load-up time. Anyhow for perspective, not a deal-breaker on my set-up.
(2) My installation of CS3 was seemless without "rewiring the fridge" simply by following the instructions Adobe issued. I too was very concerned about the prospects of having to use their CleanScript tool with all the CYA warnings they supplied with it, so I called Adobe first to discuss it - my phone call - and I'm no-one special to them - was answered rapidly, the discussion was professional and to the point - they told me not to worry about it and what to do if I ran into problems. I did it, there were no problems. End of story - for me.
(3) My version of Bridge CS3 does not crash. I've had a couple of instances when it failed to load. This is a known issue and I can only assume Adobe is working on it. But once it loads, it works. I don't like the way it sorts thumbnails so I'm still using Bridge CS2, but CS3 has features for which I'll also use it. I like the way the cache and the programming insure that whatever you do in the one is conveyed in the other. This is smart and convenient.
(4) Using CS3 so far has been "eventless" - again no rewiring of the fridge - not even the toaster - except for two issues relating to the Print module, which has already consumed pages of dialogue and some useful outcome in this thread.
(5) When I observe the recent raft of major printer and software releases, I can't help thinking that there is a general tendancy in the industry to release things to the market a bit prematurely and let the customers finalize the testing through experience. Again, it is a matter of judgment how much of this consumers should be expected to tolerate. You'll get a whole range. Some people are quite willing to grin and bear it while the bugs are fixed because they want the new features as fast as possible. Others are more conservative and want a fairly seemless operating experience even if it takes longer to reach them. I find myself somewhere in-between. One needs to distinguish between major issues and minor issues, deal-breakers from non-deal breakers and work through or around accordingly.
(6) Sometimes, it must be the case that not everything in software design is win-win except after a long period of development time. What I mean by that, for example, is that nifty new features we all like could come at the expense of more complexity that causes say, unexpected instances of incompatibility with something else (remember each of the 100s of millions of computers out there is somehow a unique environment) or slightly slower operating efficiency.
So bottom line: I think you're over-reacting some, but I also think there is merit to the view that aspects of basic functionality (especially things that worked well before) should be thoroughly protected and carefully verified as such pre-release - except of course to the extent that sometimes there are simply these trade-offs when better judgment says release now and improve later.
