|
| Adobe Creative Suite CS3 Design Premium Upgrade [Mac] [OLD VERSION] | ![Adobe Creative Suite CS3 Design Premium Upgrade [Mac] [OLD VERSION]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41viEwLxkCL._SL160_.jpg)
 enlarge | From: Adobe
Category: Software
Buy New: $827.44
Avg. Customer Rating:  15 reviews
Sales Rank: 1374
Format: Dvd-rom
Platforms: Mac Os X Intel, Mac Os X
Media: DVD-ROM
Edition: Premium - Upgrade
Autographed: No
Memorabilia: No
Batteries Included: No
Shipping Weight (lbs): 3
Dimensions (in): 0 x 0.1 x 0.1
MPN: 19500232
Model: 19500232
UPC: 883919075785
EAN: 0883919075785
ASIN: B000O27T8A
Release Date: April 20, 2007
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Customer Reviews:
| Showing reviews 1-5 of 15 | | NEXT » |
 Good upgrade! February 10, 2008
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
Great software. I give it 4 stars because Bridge is a bit CPU hungry and has some bugs. But looks like Adobe keeps fixing them so it seams working smoother after few updates. As usually a great upgrade and I love using all the programs.
 Watch Out! January 24, 2008
6 out of 6 found this review helpful
Be careful!
Adobe seems to have gone out of their way to infuriate their long time customers through an arcane, illogical and ultimately deceptive upgrade offer. You can spend hours on their website trying to make sure that you have the required products for an upgrade. Besides the obvious CS1 and CS2 versions that will let you successfully install CS3, you see listed everywhere you can upgrade from Macromedia's Studio MX or Studio 8 all over their website and marketing materials. Well, guess what? If you buy any of the print focused CS3 Design Suites you can't use the Studio MX or 8 serial numbers! After a long phone call with a polite Adobe rep who had to spend quite a bit of time himself checking with others to make sure the information was right, I was told that the ONLY CS3 upgrade package that will work with the Studio serial numbers are the CS3 Web Design packages. Not the regular print focused Design packages.
By the time I got off the phone I was totally perplexed at their lack of logic not allowing Macromedia Studio customers who use Freehand to upgrade to a product that has Illustrator included. If you buy CS3 Design Standard or Premium and expect to upgrade from a Macromedia Studio package you can get stuck with an unusable upgrade that costs nearly $400.
I've been working with Adobe's products for since beta testing version .7 of Illustrator over 20 years ago. Obviously, I've been a supporter of them for a very long time. Today I walked away from Adobe furious.
 Excellent Upgrade January 12, 2008
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
I cannot emphasize how much easier it has become to navigate The Creative Suite interface. The UI has evolved into one that is both clean and attractive, while becoming much more customizable. CS3 offers much better integration between applications and has some really cool new additions.
Overpromised, Underdelivered November 7, 2007
3 out of 5 found this review helpful
I was hoping Adobe would fix a lot of the bugs in Dreamweaver (especially, the horrible slowness on the Mac platform) but it seems they ignored Dreamweaver altogether and focused on redoing their own products.
Avoid if you can.
 An expensive cumbersome pig of a product October 18, 2007
10 out of 13 found this review helpful
I am a professional illustrator/designer/web developer and have been an Adobe fan since I discovered Photoshop (2.5?!) in high school. But lately, Adobe has given me a lot less to love, starting with the intrusive online activation of CS2, PDF overhead, and Adobe's sloppy followup to the Flash player (9 fails to install on a lot of people's OS X).
CS3, in similar fashion, seems slapdash. Photoshop and Illustrator are Adobe's cash cows, and CS3 feels like a rushed product to squeeze money out of designers. It's a PIG! It took 45 minutes to install Design Premium on my Quad Core workstation at the office. It loads slower than CS2 and takes up more resources. After opening Photoshop, Illustrator, and Flash to see what Adobe changed, I promptly went back to using CS2 and never used CS3 again. I didn't see any compelling reason to switch, or relearn the interface, as Adobe seems to require you to do every new version.
I had low expectations for CS3, as I'm usually skeptical of new product releases. This perception of cash milking wasn't helped by the fact that Adobe confusingly split the line into 6 packages. Now you have to decide which version fits you. You may end up paying for something you don't need, or want one piece of software that's in another package. You can't save some money by removing something you don't want, or adding something that you do.
One bright light I was holding onto was the possibility of Flash being better integrated with the Adobe interface and workflow. One of the most annoying things about Flash was its unfailing ability to paste shapes and gradients from Illustrator all messed up. Gradients end up as bitmaps, curves get bent, and complex shapes just seem to make Flash choke. Importing from Flash into Illustrator via cut & paste would result in similar disasters.
I was also hoping for an Illustrator-styled gradient tool (drag a line from the start point to the end point to paint the object), instead of Flash's bizarre and cumbersome one where you have to rotate a circle for radial grads, or sandwich lines for linear grads. I didn't test out CS3's cut & paste compatibility, but sadly, the interface was not integrated. It's the same old Macromedia styled tools.
As for Dreamweaver being added here, that's much like every new version of Microsoft Office that comes out each year. Do you really care? It's an HTML editor, for Pete's sake. How much improvement can you make on what is essentially a text editor? For people who handcode, you can stick w/ your old DW... or GASP! Notepad.
For me, I'll continue to use CS and CS2. Personally, I see absolutely no reason for this upgrade, except to reward Adobe for a lackluster and, what I feel, is an unfinished product. It feels very much like an early-adopter product. CS just keeps getting bigger and bigger with each version, but not more stable, dangerously approaching the point of bloatware. If it's all a suite and integrated, why the need for 4 gigs of space to install? Shouldn't many components be shared between all the products, and result in less memory/hard drive use? 700+ megs for Acrobat?! Like others have said, wait for CS4 when they actually might integrate the Macromedia products properly.
|
|
|
Copyright
©
2006 Adminpal LLC | |
