Under Edit>Preferences>Plug-Ins do you have Load Extension Panels checked?
I have several panels in cs6 on windows 8 and they seemed to have survived the update to 13.01
Thanks for your reply. The box is checked however so That Cannot BE The issue. The extension is An unsigned One... Don t know if That has anything to do with it...
Did you look in
C:\Program Files (x86)\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS6\Plug-ins\Panels
C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS6 (64 Bit)\Plug-ins\Panels
to see if the panels were actually in the right folder?
You might also ask in the configurator forum:
If it was a free panel you downloaded maybe you could the link so we can try the panel?
It would not surprise me if Piet would be an extensions writer...
Hello! Here is a fix from the Configurator team:
But, if you do not revert it if/when a future update is available for configurator, it might break the update process. http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1059632
To avoid that, one needs to
1. Save the original template.manifest.xml somewhere and move the original xml file back before updating.
2. Uninstall Configurator 3.1 and install Configurator 3.1.1 when the new release is ready.
1. Make sure Configurator 3 is not running.
2. Replace the file [Configurator 3 Installation Directory]/bundles/PHSP-13/template.manifest.xml with http://cssdk.host.adobe.com/configurator/3.0/manifestTemplate/template .manifest.PSCS6.xml. Make sure the name of the replaced file is still template.manifest.xml, not template.manifest.PSCS6.xml
3. Replace the file [Configurator 3 Installation Directory]/bundles/IDSN-08/template.manifest.xml with http://cssdk.host.adobe.com/configurator/3.0/manifestTemplate/template .manifest.IDCS6.xml. Make sure the name of the replaced file is still template.manifest.xml, not template.manifest.IDCS6.xml
4. Launch Configurator 3, open the gpc file, export the panel as CS extension and install it again to replace the old one.
Note: The recent update of Photoshop CS6 and InDesign CS6 does not impact the panel exported via "File->Export Panel", only impact the extension exported via "File->Export Panel as CS Extension".
With many people reporting failures of the updater, sometimes implying that changes to the standard Adobe installed files are confusing it, is there any chance a change such as described by the Configurator team here could break future Photoshop updates?
Are you referring to this problem or are you seeing others as well?
I'm not seeing any problems myself, but then I haven't installed much optional content.
The "problem" I'm referring to is that some folks have reported that Adobe's updater fails, then a complete uninstall and reinstall fixes it - implying that changes to the files in the Adobe installation area that the user did since installing Photoshop fouled up the updater.
Perhaps these configurator changes can't possibly foul up the updater, but a flag is raised in my mind when I see instructions to replace a file provided with the application, so I thought I'd ask.
Now I'm in for it! I, until now, had never heard of "Configurator" So natch, what do I do?
Hey! Nice idea! Whoops! Problems wit the updater. Mine works fine (AFAIK!).
My fears were confirmed in this thread, post number 6:
If you use the workaround Pierre mentions above to make custom extensions work again, it WILL break future automatic Photoshop updates.
The workaround is to save the original file you replace, then put it back before attempting a Photoshop update, or uninstall/reinstall Configurator when a new release is ready.
I guess MTW-Piet must have exported his/her panel as an extension before installing in photoshop cs6 where as i just installed the panels directly from configurator, since they were just for my own use
and that might be why i didn't have any problems with my configurator panels when updating to 13.01.
Hopefully adobe will get that straightened out for people making extensions for use by others.
So, if I am reading this correcty (a BIG assumption! ) because I will be starting frash with Configurator, I should not be seeing the problems as outlined here.
No, it will not break future automatic Photoshop updates, maybe break the update of Configurator itself.
Thanks, Yanwen Ju and Noel for the additional comments, I amended my post accordingly.
Noel, don't hesitate to PM me if you notice such issues in any post, so that I can edit them.
Thanks for the clarification, Yanwen. I always try to consider, when solving a particular problem in the trenches, what the larger implications are.
Pierre, I will be happy to PM you, though I'm not seeing the problem with discussing it publicly. My intent isn't to "prove someone wrong" or anything like that.
OK, bottom line for those who are considering this app for the first time and have 13.0.1:
What are the implications for any future updates?
Will this workaround be a necessary part of any future updates?
Will there be any changes to Configurator to avoid these problems after 13.0.1?
I can handle this type of workaround, but I find it odious (I assume Configurator is not a beta). After all, I'm not in this to be running software problem clinics solutions. I basically want to use PS as is, which I realize is not yet possible (hotkeys for instance) and add-ons by Adobe should not present themselves as third party might. FWIW, if I encounter a third party problem with extensions or add-ons, I delete these within a matter of hours or less if it requires me to follow unfamiliar protocols to get it fixed. For software guys like Noel, it's less of a problem but for folks like myself, I would rather not. (Just between you, me and the lamp post, I think Noel LOVES these kinds of issues! His nickname should be Holmes! )
So, if this will be a continuing problem, I will not use it.
I'll let Yanwen Ju summarize, as notably he (she?) has used the word "maybe" in the sentence, so you can forgive me if I don't have a bottom line answer. To be honest I don't really know, as I don't personally use Configurator, and the clarification above did not bring the issue into complete focus for me. I am hoping it makes more sense to someone who actually uses the feature.
I'm trying not to be critical of Adobe but it occurs to me that it's not on me to make sure hacks suggested by Adobe as workarounds don't break other things.
What we should be asking is this:
Why isn't the fix being delivered as 13.0.2? Assuming Adobe is confident in their updater, what's the harm in releasing new official updates as soon as a patch is discovered, instead of trying to get around the process?
I have products that are up to version numbers like 2.0.14, because I release new versions when the installer needs updating, or if I add a minor new feature, or if I have to fix a bug. People see new versions available via my updater and they think positively of it - they realize I'm working all the time to make their computing experience better.
You bring up an important point, Noel.
I definitely feel much more secure in getting updates as fixes become available than waiting for a bunch to be delivered. Smacks of a fear of being seen as incompetent by having too many numbers in the progression. The question arises: What are they hiding? Or maybe they don't have a clue! Insufficient comments in the code or whatever.
But then, too many fixes too soon smacks of rushing the product.
I vote for a longer waiting time for upgrades and shorter times for updates.
But then, too many fixes too soon smacks of rushing the product.
You can say that, but doesn't openness trump everything?
If a manufacturer says, in release notes, something like "2.0.14 - fixes blah blah", "2.0.13 - released only for a short time then removed from distribution because of an unforeseen problem", do you REALLY feel like they rushed? Or do you just understand that things go wrong and appreciate the openness?
This BS of hiding everything from the customer smacks of too much input from lawyers.
And it's not like the %*#@ thing is perfect after waiting 5 months for an update.
Not to worry! I'm with you but I'll also play devil's advocate, if for no other reason is that sometimes, we are on the devil's side of the equation!
Getting back to the question at hand, Yanwen Ju, what is the prognosis for continuing on with the current configuration of the Configurator? Can the Configurator be configured to work without messing the Updater configuration?
Ok, I am serious but if I can't laugh.....!
There is a Configurator patch, which will be available soon.
The patch to fix this issue is in progress and will be available soon. We posted the workaround on forum just to help the users to avoid this issue before the patch is available. I used "maybe", because I tried to update the Configurator with those files updated, sometimes it fails.
I'm not as directly involved as Yanwen, but my understanding is that the Configurator application needs an update and not Ps proper.
Noel Carboni wrote:
Why isn't the fix being delivered as 13.0.2?
As Yanwen, mentions there is a Configurator update to address the problem of exported panels not loading in CS6 GM products. The rub with Adobe installers comes from dependency chains and shared components (ie. shared components used by CS apps to get Flash panels working). I'm not sure how the Configurator patch will be delivered, but that's where the potential for installer conflict comes up. Ps hit it with early CS5 updates, and we've changed how Ps patches (remember the renamed plug-in hassles?).
the Configurator application needs an update and not Ps proper.
I understand you; I'm sorry - I overgeneralized a bit too much in my haste. Please read my "13.0.2" comment as "next version of the configurator component".
My point was just academic - that users would prefer that instructions from Adobe to work around a problem today don't cause a failure in their future ability to get back on track with regularly scheduled updates in the future - or at least come with additional notes on how to avoid that problem (which have since been provided). I've seen folks posting on the forum getting miffed at having to uninstall the whole shootin' match just to get the next update to work.
"Pierre, I will be happy to PM you, though I'm not seeing the problem with discussing it publicly. My intent isn't to "prove someone wrong" or anything like that"
I have no problem at all in public discussions, or to be proved wrong , it's just that I could have edited the post directly. I can add caveats if necessary.