I'm running Athlon XP 3000+, 2G memory, NVidia Geforce 6200 512mb (latest NVidia drivers), Win XP SP3 (latest Microsoft Update)

The application does not even start Photoshop CS6 with latest patch:

The application, C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS6\Photoshop.exe, generated an application error The error occurred on 12/04/2012 @ 14:40:13.734 The exception generated was c000001d at address 01638E9B (Photoshop!std___Mutex___Mutex)

Faulting application photoshop.exe, version 13.0.1.0, faulting module photoshop.exe, version 13.0.1.0, fault address 0x01238e9b.

Just some basic thoughts about economics...

You're asking Adobe to spend thousands of dollars working on this.

By contrast you could spend several hundred dollars to get a faster, more compatible system.  Or several thousand dollars to get a top of the line state of the art graphics workhorse.

How fast could Photoshop CS6 possibly run on an AthlonXP?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're talking about a processor from 2002, right?

-Noel

1.  We're not talking about performance issues, it's a bug.  A 7 month old bug that fell between the cracks.  DW 12 is also affected, doesn't even write to the event just closes.

2.  Adobe changed upgrade path from CS3 which forced me to upgrade or loose it.  A couple of hundred compare to almost 2k.

3.  50%+ of all machines in the world are running XP and of those 30% are P4/Athlon.  This especially apparant in the commercial environment.

4.  Adobe products come at a premium, and if my machine fall within your requirements, that should afford me a fix and not a dump.

5.  New machine comes in 2 months but right now I'm loosing money on my upgrade not being able to use it.

6.  Get me a temp license for 5.5 until my new machine comes in? 

-The customer Garry

Happens to me too:

AMD Athlon XP Barton 3200+ (MMX & SSE1 only)

2 Gb RAM

Windows XP SP3

As a customer, I'm asking you

If there was a fix for a previous version of Photoshop, please integrate that fix into the current version/branch.

Regards

Mihai

That's a bit short-sighted, don't you think S.Kolp?

Maybe the grand majority of people with SSE2+ machines get better performance as it is.  Waxing a bit selfish for a moment:  Personally I don't want my software to run slower because you're trying to save money and avoid buying a modern computer.

-Noel

I use 32 bit Photoshop on a modern machine for running some old plug-ins that aren't available for 64 bit.  I don't want that experience to be slower. 

I believe you're thinking about things a bit too simplistically - I wouldn't bet that the code could just be recompiled to give you compatibility.  It may be that it employs libraries that require the higher level of instruction set, and has specific code to use it (though I honestly don't know the content of Adobe's sources).  It's pretty clear that the 32 and 64 bit builds do share almost all the same sources.  I'm a career software engineer; I know how this stuff works too.

Look, you can only make the point that you want software publishers to support ancient technology for only so long.  The plain and simple fact is that Windows XP and older processors will only serve for so long.  There will come a time when you just can run new stuff on old systems.

If you need compatibility with the old hardware, run the software that was available for those systems.  By contrast, if you want to run state of the art software, you need modern hardware.

As a publisher, where would you cut off support for outdated hardware?  Clearly it would be when supporting the old stuff becomes more expensive than the additional income you'd get by supporting it.  Adobe has said they haven't even been able to maintain one working Athlon system.

-Noel