As a novice trying to follow this thread and decide if I should upgrade from CS2 - do many of these bugs stem from using CS3/CS4 with the Leopard OS? I am currently using a G5/Tiger and would try to remain on Tiger for CS4.
Since I am a beginner, I cannot judge within a larger context if I should stay with CS2, or upgrade to CS4. Time is ticking since I am on a G5 and have the Education version of CS2. If I still want to qualify for the upgrade price I need to decide during this CS4 period.
What do you think? Is CS4 solid enough to last many years into the future for a beginner such as myself? It makes more financial sense to pay for an upgrade version once in awhile than suddenly take a big hit many years down the road to purchase a full version. Adobe's policy really forces you to spend money when you might not want to becasue they only allow you to update from three versions back.
If the performance of CS4 matches, or excceds CS2 for me on my G5 - I would be happy for many years to come. In fact, at my level, CS4 would do me for the next 7 + years. I like some of the features and performance improvements that people are saying within Illustrator, and especially Phototshop. The Blob tool seems very compelling to me for the way I think as an artist. Hopefully, I won't encounter too many of the bug issues discussed because I might not reach that level of sophistication of this forum's viewers.
Is there anyone using CS4 on a G5 using Tiger? How do you find it's performance? More feed back on this would be enlightening.
Adobe Illustrator CS2 is more reliable than CS3 and CS4. CS3 is Full of Critical bugs and annoying bugs that Adobe do not care to fix them.
CS4 (like Wade said) have its bugs as well. But the question is if Adobe will care to fix them. So I will say to wait until an update or patch to fix these CS4 bugs is released (because Adobe did not fix the critical bugs on CS3).
Think about it, If you buy CS4 with bugs, chances are that you have to buy CS5 because Adobe most likely will not provide any update or patch.
For what I gather, CS2 still works better than CS3 and CS4. If you REALLY NEED the few new features in CS4 for your work, I guess you do not have a choice. But if you can wait until Adobe released an update for CS4, you should save your money and headaches.
I'll wai until halfway through the cycle, see what updates are released, and give the trial version a go - then make a decision. It's so tempting when Adobe is offering a reduced price if you purchase before February 28 - but only if it works for you in the way you need it to.
> But do you know by a fact that we got a bad deal with CS3 and no updates or
> patches are going to be release? If that the case, what assurance do I have
> that the next version is going to actually work correctly? The CS4 have bugs,
> meaning another bad program that wont be fix, how can I know that CS5 it will
> actually work correctly? Why I should trust Adobe?
I think that's what the trial version is for: to give you the opportunity to
download it, install it on a test machine, and see how it works for you,
without committing to a purchase.
All the previous versions of Illustrator came with updates (were improved over the trial versions) except for CS3. Which raises the question: Does Adobe stops doing the ethical behavior of providing updates?
By your reasoning, no one should buy CS4 because already comes with bugs.
And since you do not have any assurance that Adobe is conducting Ethical business practices with its products, do you cross your fingers and hope Adobe will provide an update for CS4?
I think we should wait until Adobe provides an update for CS4 fixing all the bugs, or wait until next version to see what kind and how many bugs it has.
I don't know if I pointed this out to anyone on this thread but the outline stroke problem is not one hundred percent fixed. Outline a rectangle or circle path and you get 10 points. the rectangle is simple to fix with the pen tool. Delete the two extra points and you are left with the rectangle and 8 points. It is the outside lower right corner point and the inside lower left point which lies directly ove the extra points.
The circle is a little different but can be fixed though a little more involved but I think it can be scripted to fix it as well.
I have in the past long time ago wrote a couple of scripts for Illustrator and they worked but I have not done since I will give it a try.
The circle it is the inside top point and the outside lower point holding the shift key you drag the point straight down the select the path connecting the two points then use the aligm panle to alin the point that is now lower of the two and then you join them.
Ask R.J. Reynolds how safe are the cigarets. Is not interesting read, is a lousy commercial. Please read about all the bugs of CS4. Like Wade said still problems with the extra anchor points. You still need to use CS2 to do the work that CS3 or CS4 cannot do!
How can you trust Adobe when they did not care to fix CRITICAL BUGS on CS3, what assurance do you have that the CS4 bugs are going to be fix?
Adobe Illustrator 8 was a bug free program to me. I am not asking for perfection, but ethical business practice from Adobe to fix CRITICAL BUGS on CS3. Please read ALL the comments posted in this discussion before adding your comments. Thank you!
Hans you can do the work in CS4 quite well. But they did sneak the bug through to add two extra points to a closed path. But I don't know of a circumstance where this would interfere with doing your work in the same way as always.
So where as it seems to be a bug it does not affect your work. So it is an is not a bug.
However the improvements to illustrator far out weigh the importance f these two extra points.
I know you are venting about Adobe but I am not certain it is at all founded and you yourself believe it.
There has never - NEVER - been a bug-free version of Illustrator. Depending on the kind of work you do - cartography, package design, web, spot color print, etc. - you may never see a bug that plagues the work of someone else. Thus, this forum has always been full of such characterizations as "bug-free" and "loaded with bugs." I tend to use the software that gets my work done best. If I encounter a suspected bug, I verify it (make sure it's reproducible by someone else), then report it, and then try to find a workaround. If I can't find one, I do my work without that feature.
In the past, when a feature that previously worked fine was broken in the new version, I kept the old version around just for that task. Inconvenient? Yes. A deal killer? Not necessarily.
I'm constantly evaluating the pros and cons of each new version of Illustrator. Is a new feature valuable enough to offset what I'm losing in productivity somewhere else? The answer is going to be different for every user, depending on what they need the application to do.
For my work - which ranges from illustration to web design - every successive version of Illustrator since 1.1 has been better than the last, bugs notwithstanding. That is, there has been more to enhance my productivity than to hinder it. I have to think that my experience is probably similar to the vast majority of users, users who never visit the User to User forum to express dissatisfaction.
Fortunately, you don't have to spend any money to find out if someone's reported bug - which may or may not be a verified bug - would be a deal-killer for you. Download the free trial, use it for 30 days and find out.
> There has never - NEVER - been a bug-free version of Illustrator.
That old song is nothing more than the digital equivalent of "nobody's perfect." It is no excuse for a software that contains bugs like the offset path/outline stroke fiasco (to name just one) to go completely uncorrected.
These are not the kind of minor glitches appropriate to the long worn out "nobody's perfect" excuse. They are broken functionality that worked in the previous version, and are therefore expected to work in the new versions. They are
at least expected to be
corrected reasonably soon after the release of the new version. But in Illustrator's case, they increasingly are not.
That's the gist of Hans's complain, and I think its quite legit. Adobe seems to have adopted a routine
policy of each new release being followed as soon as possible by one or two minor bug fixes--and that's it--no more time spent, even if major bugs still exist. It's quite understandable that Hans is now dubious about trusting Adobe's software quality.
He is not alone. I dare say I have been using most mainstream graphics software as long and as intensively as just about anyone here. My
norm is to pre-order new releases of the leading titles, because I consider it a matter of professional responsibility to keep my software up-to-date. Yet uncorrected problems associated (especially with Illustrator, which I consider the weak link in Adobe's whole product line), together with general dissatisfaction with Adobe's chronically problematic installers and burdensome registration/activation schemes has left me quite gun-shy about upgrades.
Hans's complaint echos those of many. Offhandedly dismissing it with a trite "nobody's perfect" just adds insult to the injury of Adobe's dismissive behavior re long-known, repeatedly-reported bugs in Illustrator.
It's what you can expect when a company manages to monopolise a market by buying up all its competitors. Once Freehand was killed us Illustrator users can be treated like dirt.
The bug that stops illustrator clipboards working properly with inDesign was never fixed and there's still problems with inDesigns PDF export putting in the wrong filename. I think they must be taking advice from Steve Jobs cut and paste iPhone development team.
Adobe may hate Apple for whatever reasons but there's no need to take it out on those who made Adobe successful in the first place - us the professional users of these apps since 1987.
This bad business practice will cause problems now the downturn has started though. We have zero plans to upgrade to CS4. Main reason - Photoshop is not 64-bit on the Mac platform, and illustrator has nothing new to offer us other than an entire new gamut of bugs.
Apparently James didn't read beyond the first sentence of my post. Not only did I never use the term "nobody's perfect," but I did not offer anything as an excuse. All of Adobe's software has bugs. It's a fact. Depending on the kind of work you do, you
may never encounter them. When you do, you
may find a workaround that renders them only inconvenient. On the other hand, those bugs might make the kind of work you do impossible or unrealistically difficult to complete. I can appreciate your ire.
Sure, I think Adobe should issue timely updates to fix bugs, especially bugs that slow down my productivity. Should they stop development on the next version to address bugs in the existing version? I think so. If they don't, and instead address those bugs in the next version, should I refuse to upgrade out of principle? Users will have to decide that for themselves.
Speaking for myself, if the bug fix I've been waiting for doesn't arrive before the next version, and the next version offers me those fixes plus increased productivity, my decision is easy.
Mystmatt - If Illustrator CS4 had nothing new to offer me but new bugs, I, too, would have zero plans to upgrade. Good thinking.
um Wade, I'm extremely resistant to suggestion. Maybe you could give me some reasons.
Point of fact - when an upgrade (for me) involves the purchase of 35 individual copies, it's got to be worth my while. If said company will not even offer essential and basic bug fixes because I use a non-standard language (Dutch) then seriously -where's the incentive? (see my thread on the fact that 13.02 was never offered to Dutch, Swedes and other top payers but small markets).
If you're annoyed that 13.03 or 13.04 or even 13.1 (oh that'll be CS4) never materialised my English speaking friends, imagine the big fat middle finger that was offered to non massive market people like us.
Stock-market greed means Adobe want to sell to new customers, as far as upgraders are annoying. It's kind of like the fact that your mobile company will offer the most amazing offers to new customers but the existing customers are lucky if they can get a new handset after 2 years of loyalty. This has happened because of the last few years of exaggerated growth. Watch these companies suffer in the coming 'time to tighten the belt' mentality.
I'm a packaging designer, who's won over 4 awards - we make some of the complex artworks in the business. This is not good work Adobe.
Just like with Quark Xpress - the moment a competitor offers better Service, better upgrades and better software - we jump and you lose. You (Adobe) once were that company, but you're in danger of becoming the same.
here are the reasons, for the most part the bug with extra point for outline strok is gone the two instance where there is two extra points only probably means something if you know about it. Otherwise you can just go about your business or easily get rid of the extra two points.
Here are more reason the gradient mesh bus is gone,
Multiple artboards which can behave as multiple pages Or just to have many elements from a project in one document. The way it is implemented in AI is much superior then a page layout program IMO if you are not designing books and corporate brochures that have large numbers of pages.
It gives you the possibility of having your art together as if it were a job ticket and the export or output it all at will in a variety of ways.
Even save for the web. Along with the slice tool this makes it possible to build a whole website in one AI document, this of course will lead to a feature request for integration with Fireworks and Dreamweaver.
Moving on the the blob brush offers you the opportunity of working with a tool that is much more like you would do if you were actually working with a paintbrush and it works very well with the eraser tool though that could be improved. This is an advance in the way we think about a vector program.
he gradient tools have been upgrade to give you much more control with a visual reference as well as adding transparency to gradients.
Along with the blob brush and Ai this make s life very interesting for instance you define a gradient and it has a total transparent stop that goes to a solid which the then goes to 50% transparent stop and then back to a solid and then to a complete transparent and then you make a swatch of that and start painting with your blob brush. So now you are painting on top of objects that you want to create a partially but random foreground.
And there are other things tha can be done with the blob brush. Even paint with an effect present.
Which brings us to this theme of saving the way the art reacts in different ways with one document. The effects can now be turned on and of in the effects panel so you can store effects for reuse with different versions of the artwork which can then be outputted in various ways.
So when the client wants the shadow to be like you had it in the ad, and the pattern to be like you had it in the website and the way the color or the various strokes were in the video, well you make certain they understand this is a time consuming process involving several documents that have to integrated and it will cost plenty of money to do as well.
And you take all that extra time you save take a walk and meet something young and Dutch and put that time to really good use.
In case you did not get it all you have to do is turn on and off effects to create all the features you want displayed for that version of the art. Yu also have access to the color and stroke weight directly in the effect panel.
Moving on if you can still move from all that workthat the young Dutch thing puts you throughthey are pretty healthy.
The application frame which allows you to tab you documents hit a tab and there you are the document is in the front. I place the Bridge off to the side in a tall narrow configuration so I can access the desktop and files on by bringing the Bridge to the front and you can then drag and drop from the bridge directly to any of my open documents.
This is very cool.
Though I do not how helpful this is you can now scroll the panels content and there is a separation preview which is only helpful if you get rid for the unused swatches.
BTW I might come to The Netherlands at the end of the month. To Almere to do some photography and see some of my photos in an architectural exhibit.
The only way I know of of getting you to see the features is for you to look at some of ht tutorials. Or as I did for my client in Paris to install it on their computer, a;l bet an english version of the program.
Or for you to download the trial. I think it is now available.
"It's what you can expect when a company manages to monopolise a market by buying up all its competitors. Once Freehand was killed us Illustrator users can be treated like dirt."
Those days are long gone, my friend. Even when I was the Illustrator PM (I was hired during the Illustrator 9 timeframe), Adobe no longer considered Freehand a viable competitor. Macromedia "killed" FreeHand long before Adobe had the chance to do that. There was never a time that I can remember when we ever looked at FreeHand as any kind of threat.
When I was PM, I always looked at Illustrator 8 as being our biggest competitor (I still think that previous versions of AI are the only viable competitor to today's versions). In fact, when we were working on performance-related issues, I instituted that during testing, we always compared performance to Illustrator 8 as part of our testing routines.
But the game is different these days, and Adobe's move to shipping products in a combined Suite has been the cause. There are pros and cons to this (as with anything else), but I don't believe that innovation or quality have any part in that discussion at all. In fact, I believe that Adobe's testing and quality policies are better now than they've ever been -- and they have to be when you consider that the Master Collection contains close to 100 million lines of computer code.
If you'll remember, back when CS3 shipped, we had a similar discussion to this, and I even blogged a summary about it -- which you can find here:
I actually think that the post is somewhat relevant, considering that at the time, we were lamenting about the lack of a separations preview panel in CS3 -- which just so happens to be a feature in CS4 :)
Illustrator 8 certainly was the benchmark for a long time. We didn't bother version 9 for instance (we bought a few copies). I usually find you can ignore aevery second update and wait for the next version. This changed with the move to Intel - CS3 was necessary then.
Freehand certainly became a mess but a hell of lot of designers could only use that software, we're still training our Design Director in illustrator CS3...
CS4 full suite is winging it's way to me, I always want the latest stuff, it's a useful upgrade for what I do, the seps view is a long awaited feature (but then we can just open the CS3 ai in Acrobat and do the same thing anyway), but we won't be rolling it out across the whole company as we have a hotchpotch of platforms, the dual G5s work better with CS2 for instance. CS3 on those platforms is just terrible, lagging and slow but we've had to force them all to change to that recently and they are not happy with the bugs. A lot of our opertators hate change, and times are tough if you haven't noticed :)
The fact that just like previous versions the Dutch won't be offered full bugfix versions beyond the 1st release is highly likely. And that my friend really sticks in my craw. In fact I'm not sure they're not breaking an agreement there.
> Adobe no longer considered Freehand a viable competitor. Macromedia "killed" FreeHand long before Adobe had the chance to do that.
> I always looked at Illustrator 8 as being our biggest competitor
In the minds of
customers FreeHand has
always been Illustrator's primary competitor. (Evidenced in part by emotionally-devoted AI users' sensitivity to it.) I'm speaking
functionality here, not market share. I don't think, any of the mainstream drawing programs (including FH) are what they ought to be in 2009, but compared to FreeHand 8, Illustrator 8 is a child's toy.
Regarding just about everything except AI's being a full-blown Postscript interpreter, live vector effects (Brushes, etc.), and automation (macros, scripting), FreeHand
still blows the doors off Illustrator in most areas that count every minute of every day:
* Performance (text, redraw, launching, closing, stability)
* Functional elegance (feature integration, consolidation)
* Interface organization (inspector-based, fully contextual)
* Interface consistency (options exist where & when expected)
* Accuracy (snaps, dimension values)
* Path drawing (greater capability, less tedium while drawing)
* Drawing features (user-defined drawing scales, shape primitives, etc.)
* Selection (fewer tools, greater functionality)
* Text Handling (One elegantly designed textframe object does more, easier.)
I couldn't even
tolerate Illustrator 8 in its day for my day to day work. (AI 8 didn't even have a Fit To Page print option!) I could
still do my work more comfortably and expediently in FH 8 or later.
AI-only users don't have a clue as to what was lost when Adobe shut down FreeHand. Illustrator's copying of FH-ish functionality so far (with the possible exception of the decade-late multiple pages--jury's still out) has been quite weak:
Alignment of anchorpoints. This (also decades-late) feature falls far short of the FreeHand functionality, because of Illustrator's inferior underlying selection scheme.
Select Same, Magic Wand, etc. This convoluted, scattered functionality can't even come near what FreeHand's tightly integrated and concise Graphic Find & Replace can do.
Selecting anchorPoints. In CS3, AI
finally circumvented the infuriating need to continually deselect while manipulating paths. Experienced AI users praise it like it's the Great Awakening. Yet to proficient FH users, it's mere
lip service toward FH's still vastly better path/point/segment selection/manipulation interface.
Illustrator's success is NOT due to better functionality. It is due to its perceptional and marketing position relative to PostScript, Adobe, and PDF. Despite all its continually changing window-dressing, it is outdated, buggy, sluggish. Despite its focus on whiz-bang instant-eye-candy features, it still lags decades behind other drawing programs in fundamental drawing functionality.
FH, having laid dormant since a year before Adobe's acquisition still provides these very practical and
rightly expected functional superiorities over Illustrator:
User defined drawing scales
Reliable snaps (grid, points, guides)
Proper corner radius command
Geometric shape primitives
Proper cutting tool
More Grad types, all with on-object adjustment handles
Join multiple paths (without tedously selecting endpoints)
Better (more sensible, predictable, practical) path combination
Reliable, comprehensive contextual properties inspector
Autofitting text frames
Proper paragraph rules
Properly behaving paragraph styles
Better Find/Replace text
Better pathType interface
Dedicated (and integrated) perspective drawing interface
Graphic Find & Replace
Proper ruler Guides (don't conflict with pasteboard bounds)
Quick, easy, reliable select-through
Bend/resume straight segments by dragging (without adding points)
Repeatedly delete endpoints/resume
Turn OFF auto join!
Turn OFF fill open paths!
Contact/enclose marquee selection choice
Reliable palette positioning and workspace settings
User-defined stroke weight presets
Fully customizable toolbars
Proper hairline stroke weight
That's just off-the-top. The list goes on and on.
How much has a long-time AI user paid over the years for AI and its decades-late functionality, its confused and scattered interface, its sluggish behavior, and lately, its uncorrected bugs?
AI, still clinging to its archaic trappings, just can't catch up. I doubt very seriously that I will ever live to see AI match--let alone exceed, as it should--FH's efficiency and elegance. The fact that AI-devoted users deny, dismiss, or are just ignorant of FH's advantages doesn't change the fact that vector drawing has suffered a serious setback by FH's discontinuance. Too many will just never know.
zI know you think that these are really important issues and tools but if I selected any of these features that Illustrator lacks it would only be gradients and in line graphics that would be useful to me and I am not certain I would want them implemented in the same way as they were in Freehand.
The inline graphics have to have lots of choice in order for them to be useful for me.
The gradients are good the way they are in Illustrator but I would like to see a gradient effect that offer me the options rather then a gradient applied permanently to the object.
There you have it. Don't upgrade to CS4. Upgrade to the vastly superior Freehand.
If upgrading to a still-existing Freehand were a possibility, I would definitely give it a look. But it's not, and now it's only spilled milk.
For all its poor performance, inelegance, ugly interface, inaccuracy, tedious path drawing, and so on, somehow I'm able to get my work done in Illustrator.
Rather than post endless lists of all the ways Freehand was superior to Illustrator (snap sounds?), I think you'd be more effective if you made feature requests for the things you think are most important, and try to get other users to support that feature. Adobe owns the Freehand code (they do, don't they?). If enough sentiment were directed at a particular item, perhaps the Illustrator engineers could be persuaded to take a look at it.