Photoshop CS3 won't be 64-bit

I work in software, and I suspect the reason for this isn't because of anything particular, but just a lack of manpower and time. Roadmaps for features and additions to a particular software are laid out ahead of time, and developers do not have the luxury of following new trends and developments if they want to have any hope of shipping a product on time.

When the roadmap for CS3 was drawn out, 64-bit wasn't much on the horizon yet, the rate of adoption probably caught Adobe off guard. This is a very significant feature, and will probably make it into CS4 now that they've seen the demand.

Adobe continually takes two steps forward, one step back.

Some of us here are recent switchers I'm sure. Those of us have to feel for poor AMD who has had a 64-bit processor out for 3 years now. Its very well adopted by adobe's target market I'm sure. When I was with Windows I was sitting there with my thumb up my ars hearing intel biased companies like MS and Adobe that 64-bit sowftware was around the corner. MS kept WinX64 out of our hands until Intel could profit from it too. Poor freaking AMD.

Adobe didn't have time to work on 64-bit because they were far too busy with all the artistic and stylistic concepts and designs it took to come up with CS3's icon suite. Wankers.

Why is Adobe the new Quark? At first I just thought they hated Apple when they didn't adopted DisplayPS (or whatever it was called) and ultimately Mac users since we refused to go the PC side thus saving them development costs Nevermind using PS on a PC is like driving a Ferrari in the DMV parking lot. Also nice call on dumping the "new" Premiere (why bother upgrading a Mac app that needed 4 minutes to boot?, I heard Apple picked it up and called it iMovie (anything happen there?) And if you say FRAMEMAKER out loud, be prepare3d to run. But now they are mad at MS for adding a PDF creator ... does anyone sense a pattern here? Who's left to antagonize and annoy? So, why not feud with the only two desktop OS' makers and 50-75% of your users - nice plan there.

Sure almost all Macs have 64-bit hardware, but Tiger has only partial 64-bit support. With Leopard we will get full 64-bit support, and I'm sure Apple will market well the first "TRUE" 64-bit system across it's entire Mac line. Even still, we need Intel to allow more tahn 4GB (total) RAM for it's C2D line of processors.

The 2GB per application is on Windows, on OS X an application can have up to 3GB. I guess that takes some of the heat off fpr Mac Users.

#4

Why's that? Windows dosen't get a 64bit Binary either.

what the f... does adobe speak about lacks of 64b adoption by consumer ???

photoshop (and other cs tools) are professional tools, of course that people doesn't care about technical computing details !

me I care becaUUUuuuse I am an engineer in computing, okay
but digital artists and professional in photography WOULD CARE about a photoshop which could works upon more bigger and better pictures, which could use more memory to accelerate the works and so on. to open a few of pictures in the same time, not caring about the "2gB limits" of memory.

Professionals would of course use win64b or leopard, with xeon or core 2 duo cpu, if their work need it, they will buy a computer to use a better adobe CS.

it's wrong to say it's "consumer" who have to demand technicals computing details. Consumers want features, better tools, improvement in their workflow,

of course it needs computing technology but it's an engineering problems.



well, it will be fore CS4 ,and people will be amAAAaazed by the "new" possibilities of photoshop cs4.



I don't like false excuses.

I'm tired of Adobe making excuses. It's pretty clear that Mac users are second-class citizens to them.