Digital BW, The Print

Carolyn Frayn writes:

> You lumped an entire user base into two categories.

The reality is that the entire user base does fall roughly into those
two categories.  People are either interested in computers for their own
sake, or they're not.  The vast majority of people using computers today
are interested in computers as tools, not as ends in themselves.  This
is quite a change from the early days of computers, when the only people
using them were computer geeks (and a handful of accountants or others
who absolutely could not do their job without computers, even in those
days).

> I think of my computers as tools, and I upgrade, and I produce, I
> don't spend all my time tinkering.. I took exception to your
> absolutism.

Why do you upgrade?

> I could not produce what I do now if I was back on my little mac when
> first introduced to my graphic arts division... I could not work as I
> do now back on the DOS systems I used to debug for the sister end of
> same company.

So you've only upgraded twice, from the old little Mac to a new OS X
Mac, and from a MS-DOS system to Windows XP?

> As for Photoshop and older computer systems... gone are the days of
> having a smoke while an image did a little rotate... Applying
> corrections or elements and saving every iteration in case I have to
> go back... Creating alpha channels to mask, and most recently, jumping
> back and forth between 8 and 16 bit images to correct them.

I have yet to see a system that can do anything in Photoshop on a
reasonably large image with no delay at all.  For one thing, that would
require more memory than it is possible to configure on most systems.

There are still some impressionist filters that I have in Photoshop
which might well take an hour or more to finish even on the fastest PCs
(needless to say, I don't use them under such circumstances).

> I've had a few years of observations myself. I turned my commodore 64
> monitor into a tv, it was still useful, the computer? No. I realize
> you are not referring to these old methods, but your statement seemed
> to relate a total negative stance on any developments.

There's nothing wrong with upgrading when you _need_ to upgrade.  But
most people don't need to upgrade ... they simply do so because they've
been conditioned to do so by vendors, and they never stop to critically
assess the real need (if any) for upgrades.

The only people who look at upgrades with the critical view that they
merit are people who must maintain production, mission-critical systems,
or very large installed bases of computers.  These people cannot afford
to blow money on useless upgrades, nor can they afford the high risks
associated with them.

> Sure there are upgrades not worth the cost, I can't remember, but
> one I passed by in the PS line.

So you've upgraded with every other version?  What did you need in each
new version that you didn't already have?

> If you are producing what you wish in PS5.5, and have no need to
> upgrade for a reason, then cool. If you are happy with your older
> smaller slower systems, then cool. I remember PS5 being a great leap
> from my previous versions. But I also remember how slow it all was.

It does the job for me, particularly with photography, since photography
requires only a very limited set of tools (as compared with graphic art,
which requires a much larger set of tools).  Photoshop CS has
activation, which corrupts the boot sectors of disks and destabilizes my
system, and potentially prevents me from working on critical projects.
It adds nothing that would be useful to me in exchange for this.  It
costs too much money.  And Adobe still doesn't fix fundamental problems
with the product, such as memory management--it just adds more bells and
whistles with each release, because it's a cheaper, shorter path to
revenue.

> I believe this stuff advances faster than anything before it... I
> agree it's sometimes either hard to keep up or not worthwhile to some.
> But there are no absolutes.

The basics of image manipulation have not changed in many years.

> For me personally, the last two years of upgrades has given me a very
> significant time savings.. And that in turn increases revenue.

How much of a net gain did you calculate as the direct result of
upgrades during your last audit?

> On top of that, what I produce is more satisfying, I have the control
> I desire.

You've had control with every version of Photoshop.  If anything recent
versions do more and more on their own, without your control.

> Can't imagine saving my 2Gig files to floppies either :) Another great leap
> for me, PS Large Document Format file saving.. Yahoo.

You can't put 2 GB of information on a floppy, no matter what format you
use.