Possible new feature for next Photoshop

In article alpine.DEB.2.02.1110242130410.2055@ryan-BigStorm, Ryan
McGinnis wrote:

Adobe does not "limit compatibility". Camera makers continually change
the RAW file format over and over again, requiring Adobe to task a team of
coders to recode their RAW engine to deal with them. These employees cost
money.

that's because every new sensor is a little different. they don't sit
around and think gee how can we change something.

Adobe has tried to create a standard RAW format (DNG) to rule them
all to avoid this problem, but the camera makers will have none of it.

there's very little advantage for them.

In article , Trevor
wrote:

All very true, and you can also use the camera makers software to convert
from RAW before opening in PS. However most PS users find using
Bridge/camera-raw or Lightroom to be an easier work flow situation, and
Adobe knows it. The changes to many new camera model RAW formats are
trivial, but Adobe needs some excuse to force you to upgrade, since many of
the new features are not enough to justify the price for most people.

adobe adds cameras for *free* for 18-24 months, then adds a bunch of
features to the next version. if you don't want the new features, don't
buy it. very simple.

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
[]
Hmmm; what are the bad mainstream Windows vintages? 1 and 2, for sure.
ME isn't mainstream, happily. Vista, they say ("they" said it strongly
enough that I avoided it at home, and work avoided it, so I've never
actually seen Vista and can't testify to its quality).

Vista is now quite workable. Manufacturers now have device drivers, and
Vista has two service packs. WIndows-7 is a refinement on Vista, and I
prefer the UI on 7 to that on Vista. With Wndows-7 available, Vista is
obsolete.

Cheers,
David

On 25/10/2011 09:45, David J Taylor wrote:
"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
[]
Hmmm; what are the bad mainstream Windows vintages? 1 and 2, for sure.
ME isn't mainstream, happily. Vista, they say ("they" said it strongly
enough that I avoided it at home, and work avoided it, so I've never
actually seen Vista and can't testify to its quality).

Vista is now quite workable. Manufacturers now have device drivers, and
Vista has two service packs. WIndows-7 is a refinement on Vista, and I
prefer the UI on 7 to that on Vista. With Wndows-7 available, Vista is
obsolete.

Cheers,
David

Agreed. And IMO Windows 7 should have been a *free* upgrade for Vista
users, but that's ignoring commercial reality.

On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 09:45:17 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
[]
Hmmm; what are the bad mainstream Windows vintages? 1 and 2, for sure.
ME isn't mainstream, happily. Vista, they say ("they" said it strongly
enough that I avoided it at home, and work avoided it, so I've never
actually seen Vista and can't testify to its quality).

Vista is now quite workable. Manufacturers now have device drivers, and
Vista has two service packs. WIndows-7 is a refinement on Vista, and I
prefer the UI on 7 to that on Vista. With Wndows-7 available, Vista is
obsolete.

Yeah, but you try find locating a file with Windows 7. I don't mean
getting hold of the file but finding where the file actually is.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , david-
lid says...

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
[]
Hmmm; what are the bad mainstream Windows vintages? 1 and 2, for sure.
ME isn't mainstream, happily. Vista, they say ("they" said it strongly
enough that I avoided it at home, and work avoided it, so I've never
actually seen Vista and can't testify to its quality).

Vista is now quite workable. Manufacturers now have device drivers, and
Vista has two service packs.

Manufacturers have always had device drivers for new products. But they
don't have device drivers for older products. There is no device driver
for any 100VG NIC. There are no device drivers for older HP printers
and scanners. The same is true for many other products. Microsoft's
changing the driver model has pretty much churned the whole market.

WIndows-7 is a refinement on Vista, and I
prefer the UI on 7 to that on Vista. With Wndows-7 available, Vista is
obsolete.

I consider most changes in the UI to be change for the sake of change.

In article , lid
says...

On 25/10/2011 09:45, David J Taylor wrote:
"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
[]
Hmmm; what are the bad mainstream Windows vintages? 1 and 2, for sure.
ME isn't mainstream, happily. Vista, they say ("they" said it strongly
enough that I avoided it at home, and work avoided it, so I've never
actually seen Vista and can't testify to its quality).

Vista is now quite workable. Manufacturers now have device drivers, and
Vista has two service packs. WIndows-7 is a refinement on Vista, and I
prefer the UI on 7 to that on Vista. With Wndows-7 available, Vista is
obsolete.

Cheers,
David

Agreed. And IMO Windows 7 should have been a *free* upgrade for Vista
users, but that's ignoring commercial reality.

Why should it have been free?

"Eric Stevens" wrote in message
...
[]
Yeah, but you try find locating a file with Windows 7. I don't mean
getting hold of the file but finding where the file actually is.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Well, if you will use "My documents..."!

I just had the "hunt that file" problem ... on Windows XP.

I guess you may be referring to the virtualised "Program Files" and other
locations, provided for software which doesn't follow the standards?

Cheers,
David

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
in.local...
[]
Manufacturers have always had device drivers for new products. But they
don't have device drivers for older products. There is no device driver
for any 100VG NIC. There are no device drivers for older HP printers
and scanners. The same is true for many other products. Microsoft's
changing the driver model has pretty much churned the whole market.

Yes, and we don't have DOS printer drivers for DOS WordStar for the latest
Canon printer drivers!

WIndows-7 is a refinement on Vista, and I
prefer the UI on 7 to that on Vista. With Wndows-7 available, Vista is
obsolete.

I consider most changes in the UI to be change for the sake of change.

One positive example - you want to run a second copy of a program such as
Windows Explorer or a command-prompt:

- XP and Vista, go and navigate the start menu to find and run the program

- Windows-7, right click the program icon in the taskbar and run another
copy.

For me, it's a refinement rather than change for changes sake, but I
appreciate your view may differ.

Cheers,
David

In article , david-
lid says...

"Eric Stevens" wrote in message
...
[]
Yeah, but you try find locating a file with Windows 7. I don't mean
getting hold of the file but finding where the file actually is.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Well, if you will use "My documents..."!

I just had the "hunt that file" problem ... on Windows XP.

I guess you may be referring to the virtualised "Program Files" and other
locations, provided for software which doesn't follow the standards?

Finding a file on XP is not particularly difficult--there is an updated
search available that works really well.

On the other hand, Windows 7 search is an abomination. To use it
effectively you have to memorize the command syntax--by trying to be
"helpful" it hinders you at every turn. And then it often doesn't find
what you're looking for.

And the problem with Windows 7 is organizing everything into
"libraries". This could be useful if something could be in multiple
libraries, but as it stands it's just substituting a heierarchical
strucuture that doesn't relate to the physical hardware for one that
does relate to the physical hardware, to no real purpose that I can see
other than possibly some pipedream about everything being in "the
cloud".