Digital BW, The Print

Just found out the hard way that Photoshop CS will not install on a 
Windows 98 machine. You must have WIN2000 SP3 or higher, or XP. This 
may be the final straw that will break my WIN98SE back. Time for a 
new computer I reckon.

So, on my next few days off I'll be hunched over an XP machine trying 
to get programs to install, transferring data and trying to remember 
where all my program serial numbers are. I was hoping to wait until 
2004 when the new version of XP with 64-bit support is supposed to 
come out, but oh well.

* -----Original Message-----
* From: sanfo2003 [mailto:SandyCornelius@...] 
* Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 8:54 PM
* To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
* Subject: [Digital BW] Photoshop CS WIN98 caveat
* 
* 
* Just found out the hard way that Photoshop CS will not install on a 
* Windows 98 machine. You must have WIN2000 SP3 or higher, or XP. This 
* may be the final straw that will break my WIN98SE back. Time for a 
* new computer I reckon.
* 
* So, on my next few days off I'll be hunched over an XP machine trying 
* to get programs to install, transferring data and trying to remember 
* where all my program serial numbers are. I was hoping to wait until 
* 2004 when the new version of XP with 64-bit support is supposed to 
* come out, but oh well.

Sanfo,

I know the extra cost is an unpleasant surprise but XP is a much better OS
than Win 98. The learning curve is pretty easy and you should not have to
reload all your software if you do an upgrade to XP on your Win98 machine.
Photoshop CS should be well worth the effort in any case.

Martin

>...Photoshop CS will not install on a Windows 98 machine. 
>You must have WIN2000 SP3 or higher, or XP. This 
>may be the final straw that will break my WIN98SE back. Time for a 
>new computer I reckon.

>So, on my next few days off I'll be hunched over an XP machine trying 
>to get programs to install, transferring data and trying to remember 
>where all my program serial numbers are. I was hoping to wait until 
>2004 when the new version of XP with 64-bit support is supposed to 
>come out, but oh well.

I share your pain.  I just ordered a new Dell today.

Paul 
http://www.PaulRoark.com

It is not just the version of Windows.  As I recall, CS also requires 
a chip running at a minimum of 800mh.  I am about to order a new 
computer also as my Pentium II is not going to do it.

Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> >...Photoshop CS will not install on a Windows 98 machine. 
> >You must have WIN2000 SP3 or higher, or XP. This 
> >may be the final straw that will break my WIN98SE back. Time for a 
> >new computer I reckon.
> 
> >So, on my next few days off I'll be hunched over an XP machine 
trying 
> >to get programs to install, transferring data and trying to 
remember 
> >where all my program serial numbers are. I was hoping to wait 
until 

> >2004 when the new version of XP with 64-bit support is supposed to 
> >come out, but oh well.
> 
> I share your pain.  I just ordered a new Dell today.
> 
> Paul 
> http://www.PaulRoark.com

I recently built(about 4 months ago) an AMD 2800+ w/1G of 128bit memory, w/WIN XP.  I just installed CS and it would really be nice to have more memory and speed for all of the nice new 16bit operations.  If you are buying a new system, based on what I have seen of CS thus far, I would go for the highest performance, most memory the budget would allow.  
 
Having said this, however, I really only have the issues on very large files.  So, if one doesn't normally work with very large files, a newer mid-range XP based machine should work just fine.  (Realizing, of course, that 'just fine' is in the eye of the beholder.)
 
 
Tom Baker

Stephen Kobrin <kobrins@...> wrote:
It is not just the version of Windows.  As I recall, CS also requires 
a chip running at a minimum of 800mh.  I am about to order a new 
computer also as my Pentium II is not going to do it.

Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> >...Photoshop CS will not install on a Windows 98 machine. 
> >You must have WIN2000 SP3 or higher, or XP. This 
> >may be the final straw that will break my WIN98SE back. Time for a 
> >new computer I reckon.
> 
> >So, on my next few days off I'll be hunched over an XP machine 
trying 
> >to get programs to install, transferring data and trying to 
remember 
> >where all my program serial numbers are. I was hoping to wait 
until 
> >2004 when the new version of XP with 64-bit support is supposed to 
> >come out, but oh well.
> 
> I share your pain.  I just ordered a new Dell today.
> 
> Paul 
> http://www.PaulRoark.com


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> From: Stephen Kobrin [mailto:kobrins@...]
> 
> It is not just the version of Windows.  As I recall, CS also requires 
> a chip running at a minimum of 800mh.  I am about to order a new 
> computer also as my Pentium II is not going to do it.

That's just a suggested minimum. They can't enforce that.

-- 

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

Actually given the setup program they use, if they
wanted to enforce a minimum they could.  Why they
would is a mystery but technically it is very
possible.  

brentley

--- "Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@...> wrote:

> > From: Stephen Kobrin
> [mailto:kobrins@...]
> > 
> > It is not just the version of Windows.  As I
> recall, CS also requires 
> > a chip running at a minimum of 800mh.  I am about
> to order a new 
> > computer also as my Pentium II is not going to do
> it.
> 
> That's just a suggested minimum. They can't enforce
> that.
>

How best to mix and match Photoshop upgrades and platform upgrades is 
perhaps not intuitive. Here is a quote from BareFeats.com's Quick 
Takes column:

"11/05/03 -- We received our copy of Adobe Photoshop CS (8.0) 
today.We ran our two action (SP and MP) files on our Dual G5 [latest 
and greatest Mac desktop]. Is it faster than version 7.01 with G5 
plugin? No. The old version was 17-18% faster: [table wouldn't copy] 
(both versions were run under OS X "Panther" [10.3, the new-born 
successor to "Jaguar"])"

For the table missing from the quote above see

http://www.barefeats.com/quick.html

Sam


At 7:14 AM -0800 11/5/03, Tom Baker wrote:

>I recently built(about 4 months ago) an AMD 2800+ w/1G of 128bit 
>memory, w/WIN XP.  I just installed CS and it would really be nice 
>to have more memory and speed for all of the nice new 16bit 
>operations.  If you are buying a new system, based on what I have 
>seen of CS thus far, I would go for the highest performance, most 
>memory the budget would allow. 
>
>Having said this, however, I really only have the issues on very 
>large files.  So, if one doesn't normally work with very large 
>files, a newer mid-range XP based machine should work just fine. 
>(Realizing, of course, that 'just fine' is in the eye of the 
>beholder.)
>
>
>Tom Baker
>
>Stephen Kobrin <kobrins@...> wrote:
>It is not just the version of Windows.  As I recall, CS also requires
>a chip running at a minimum of 800mh.  I am about to order a new
>computer also as my Pentium II is not going to do it.
>
>Steve