Creative Suite - Standard or Premium?

[Fred Weiss]

We're finally doing some upgrading at my place and I am getting ready to order the CS2 upgrade (from Photoshop 6). The difference price between the Standard and the Premium versions is $250.

I'm a bit confused reading about it at Adobe's website and would like some opinions from members here who have it or have researched it.

One point of confusion is what, if any, version of GoLive and Acrobat comes with the Standard version? And, if they are scaled back versions, what would I be missing?

I currently handle my website needs with Dreamweaver MX which has a limited future. Any comments on the GoLive product will be of interest.

My primary reason for the upgrade is for the Illustrator and Photoshop components.

 

[Rick]

I have Premium, but if you are comfortable with Dreamweaver, then I see no need for GoLive. I got Premium for Acrobat myself. With the accusition of Macromedia, I would imagine the upgrade will be wildly different. If you notice already, Freehand was not included in Studio 8.

I think Standard is okay unless you see the need for Acrobat...then you need to go Premium. Otherwise I would get Standard and wait until the next upgrade to see how they incorporate Macromedia into the next CS. Who knows if Go Live will even be around or if they put the best of both features into one program. Have you upgraded your Dreamweaver?

 

[Bobby H]

I have the Premium version of CS2. The Standard version does not come with any version of GoLive or Acrobat.

DreamweaverMX is my main choice for editing websites, but GoLive has some handy features. Its visual CSS tools are pretty nice for developing Cascading Style Sheets and managing a good amount of D-HTML layer content. It also has some pretty handy features for editing HTML pages for viewing on mobile phones and PDAs.

Between GoLive and Dreamweaver, I expect GoLive will be the application that gets discontinued, not Dreamweaver. DW simply has a much larger user base. If anything, we may see some GL features worked into a new version of Dreamweaver (along with better integration with Adobe applications).

Acrobat Professional is the real incentive to get the Premium version of the Adobe Creative Suite. Sure, you can save native Adobe Illustrator and InDesign files in various PDF formats and even password protect them. On the downside, the PDF files Illustrator and InDesign save often have much larger file sizes. Acrobat Pro offers more control to data compress certain content and keep file sizes smaller. Acrobat Professional gives you batch processing tools to "distill" many .prn files into PDF format. It can convert web pages, MS Word files and lots of other stuff into PDF format as well. You can unsecured PDF files and then apply password protection to them. Acrobat Pro installs the latest Adobe PPD and Distiller 7 so you can print to PDF from any application on your computer system. It also installs instant PDF icons within MS Office applications.

Acrobat Pro supports creation of layered Acrobat files with end user input fields. You can send someone a client sketch and then provide fields for them to fill in on what they like or don't like. Acrobat Pro will also allow you to convert existing PDF files over into other formats, such as EPS.

In the end, the extra couple hundred bucks was worth it to me to get the CS2 Premium package. But if you have absolutely no need for GoLive or Acrobat Pro then the CS2 Standard upgrade should do fine.

 

[BobT]

The only practical reason, as mentioned, is the addition of Acrobat to the Premium version.
Probably trivia to you but here it is; I originally had the Premium Suite version of CS. I did not think I really needed Photoshop CS2 so I just ordered upgrade versions of Illustrator and InDesign. InDesign installed just fine. The Illustrator CS2 did not want to install because I was installing it (single version) to a Suite version. I called Adobe and got a "Yup, you need the Suite upgrade".
Sorry, I already paid for it so a bit of deceit in the qualification was in order. I got it installed. I think it is pretty sleazy on Adobes part to pull tricks like that.
I installed upgrades on 5 Macs and 2 IBM's. I Mac and I IBM had the Siute, and I had the same problem with both. Rant OFF!
In my humble opinion, Dreamweaver is head and shoulders above Go Live, and In My Opinion Again, I think they bought Macromedia just to get rid of the competition. What other High Level web authoring package is out there. I do not mean to cause any hard feelings or discontent but Microsofts package is not a contender with the capabilities of Dreamweaver.
Bob

 

[Bobby H]

Again, there is no chance Dreamweaver will be discontinued. GoLive will be the app that gets the axe.

Adobe purchased Macromedia primarily as a means of securing its market space (and making sure someone else didn't aquire Macromedia first). Lots of market consolidation is happening. Autodesk just purchased Alias|Wavefront and previously aquired Discreet -so it has an extremely formidable arsenal of 3D and video editing/graphics applications. Avid purchased Softimage and Pinnacle. Apple is doing a bunch of things on their platform that arguably threaten Adobe (but could wind up screwing the Mac platform worse by Adobe going Windows-only in response). Anyway, Adobe can't just kick back and let other stuff happen around it.

Macromedia was an attractive property since it pretty much owns the web graphics space by way of Flash and Dreamweaver. The next version of Adobe After Effects (version 7) will incorporate a lot of StudioMX style interface elements and have very direct integration with Flash8 -including the ability to make Flash Pro 8 videos with alpha channel content.

The only Macromedia apps that appear threated by way of this merger are Freehand and Fireworks.

Freehand will definitely get discontinued or sold off to another company. Too many mistakes happened to Freehand under Macromedia's management over the past few years. Perhaps Illustrator may incorporate some FH features. But the program appears to be on its way to the graveyard.

It's harder to say what will happen to Fireworks. Adobe could very well get rid of ImageReady or just merge some of its handy functions into Fireworks. It's a coin toss. But I can't see both ImageReady and Fireworks surviving since both pretty well do the same thing. One thing is absolutely certain: Fireworks has absolutely no shot at all whatsoever to displace Photoshop. Adobe Photoshop is the tent pole application for Adobe.

 

[iSign]

Fred, I'm also considering the CS2 suite.

I plan to go for the premium edition because of several good things I've heard about acrobat which have me convinced that, over time, I will learn & use some of those features. Some of what I was interested in is along the lines of Bobby's explanation of documents with fields that a recipient can fill out.

I didn't memorize exactly what else I liked about what I heard, so I can't repeat it properly, but something about programing an auto-response to replys through those forms/fields, as well as segmenting marketing targets with various fields in documents, such as an e-newsletter for example, & auto-sorting replies according to segments based on the on-line interaction of the recipient with your pdf document, & facilitating targeted marketing responses (auto & otherwise) to the correct (self-categorized) market segments.

Fred, are you already running the CS1 suite? I am up to CS1 on my Illustrator license... but I'm still on photoshop 6. When I upgrade to the CS2 suite based on my Photoshop license, I will then own the latest illustrator under that license allowing me to sell (& legally transfer licensing for) my existing Illustrator version CS1 (& every upgrade back to v.4) That should go a long ways tword paying for the udgrade.

 

[Fred Weiss]

Well I guess I'll go with the Pro version. I own a license for Acrobat 4 and use the product from time to time ... doubt that I'll use the interactive features though, but one never knows. I could upgrade that on its own for $99 but doubt that it would function properly as part of the suite. Besides, genrating EPS out of received PDF files may find some valuable uses.

The GoLive thing concerns me a bit as I really don't want to go through learning it but it may end up being the survivor. If not, I would expect Adobe would then incorporate Dreamweaver into CS3 rather than keep it going as an independent application.

Bobby ... tell me about Live Trace. I played the tour movie at the Adobe site for the suite and it made mention of "not having to concern one's self about closed paths". It wasn't clear to me whether they insured that all paths were closed or whether Illustrator simply handles open paths (which it has long before the current version. Being in the clipart development business, this feature has me highly interested.

Doug, I am at Illustrator 10 and Photoshop 6.

Thanks all for your feedback.

 

[Bobby H]

On Live Trace and Live Paint, I'm not sure really what they mean by "not having to worry about closed paths." Perhaps that might mean something if all you're doing with vector artwork is printing it.

Some of the behaviors of Live Paint and Live Trace has similar results to past versions of Adobe Streamline, in that you can get a mix of open and closed paths and have some open paths featuring fills. Perhaps the thing Adobe is talking about is the improved method AI CS2 goes about doing it. It's a bit more possible to have a kind of sketchy drawing Live Traced or Live Painted and have fills applied to interior areas where some small gaps in the line art might be present.

Still, I'm all about turning on Outline View to see what I have exactly in terms of real paths. You can use broad expand functions to get lots of line strokes and other items turned into real paths. Flatten transparancy will do much of the same thing, depending of effects used.

The things I like most about Live Paint and Live Trace are all the extra presets for different kinds of results. I think the tracing accuracy is a bit better. However the requirement remains that you feed Live Paint and Live Trace good quality scans. You're not going to get great auto-tracing quality feeding it low res internet images.

 

[Rick]

In case no one has noticed, Adobe is packaging Macromedia together now on both Macromedia and the Adobe site.

 

[Bobby H]

The aquisition of Macromedia is another thing that may get me peeved at Adobe.

Right now I have a dilema to consider. Do I pay $399 by Dec. 31 to upgrade my current StudioMX license to Studio 8? Or do I wait to see how much the price increases Jan. 1, 2006? Or do I wait to see how Studio 8 is bundled with the next Adobe Video Collection (since I seriously want After Effects 7 and some of those other apps)?

The upgrade paths are very unclear. And they may be a tad bit unfair.

For instance, the upgrade pricing on the Creative Suite package really stinks. I had to pay the same price as someone who only owned Photoshop -even though I had several licenses of other previous Adobe app releases.

At least with Macromedia they had a tiered pricing structure. With the StudioMX upgrade if you had 2 or more previous Macromedia apps you got a better deal than someone upgrading from only one app.

How is Adobe going to treat all those users who already own previous editions of Macromedia apps (as well as Adobe apps)? Just jack up the price and charge everyone the stupid "upgrading from Photoshop" price?

The Video Collection package poses another problem of overlap. I want After Effects Professional. But the package containing AE Pro also adds in a PhotoshopCS2 license. I already have PhotoshopCS2 by way of my CS2 Premium suite package. I don't need two full PhotoshopCS2 licenses.

Some of this retarded product overlap makes me just want to wait out an upgrade cycle or two for Adobe to get their stuff straight.

 

[Rick]

I have the same issues regarding Studio 8 and thier bundling and overlap in product. I also have the issue with Mac going Intel. I was thinking of upgrading my G5 and getting a Powerbook too, now with Mac going Intel, I may wait till late 2006 or early 2007 till I spend that much on a high end system and then deal with the hardware/software issues

 

[Bobby H]

Yes, the whole "Mactel" thing is another tough dilema. Complicate it even further with the need to shift everything to 64-bit code.

The different painful jumps on the horizon have me wanting to just get enough of what I need in terms of software to get by for at least 2 to 4 years.

My hope is by the time things get settled with Apple going to Intel code and Windows going 64-bit and "Vista" is that we will see some "common library" installers from folks like Adobe. Ultimately that is really what most people want -a single SKU box that can easily install on a Mac or PC.

Right now I'm doing most of my home work from a Dell notebook running XP Pro. My old Dell desktop computer is getting in need of replacement. But I think I'll just keep this notebook going strong at least until the new Intel-based Macs hit the market. It will be really nice if those new boxes can dual boot both MacOSX and WindowsXP. It will be even better if future Adobe/Macromedia upgrades will be able to install on your platform of choice without having to pay extra. Users would finally be able to jump across platforms without the process being painful.

 

[Fred Weiss]

For instance, the upgrade pricing on the Creative Suite package really stinks. I had to pay the same price as someone who only owned Photoshop -even though I had several licenses of other previous Adobe app releases.

Having just purchased the CS2 upgrade from Photoshop, I can tell you first hand that there is a $200 difference between upgrading from PS or CS.

Upgrade pricing

I was pleased, however, that their license and the new activation/authorization specifically legalizes installation on two boxes providing they are not both used at the same time.

 

[Bobby H]

The "pricing stinks" part that I mentioned referred to what owners of multiple Adobe app licenses had to pay to upgrade versus someone who only owned Photoshop. Adobe had that pricing policy when they first introduced the Creative Suite 1 package.

I had previous full versions of Photoshop, Illustrator, GoLive, LiveMotion and PageMaker. I think I should have received a better upgrade price rather than having to pay the same amount of money as someone who only owned Photoshop. That's not really very fair.

The only deal Adobe extended to anyone was the CS2 price for users of CS1. In effect, I already had something along those lines in the first place. Yet I had to pay hundreds more for my CS2 Premium box.

 

[Fred Weiss]

The "pricing stinks" part that I mentioned referred to what owners of multiple Adobe app licenses had to pay to upgrade versus someone who only owned Photoshop. Adobe had that pricing policy when they first introduced the Creative Suite 1 package.

I had previous full versions of Photoshop, Illustrator, GoLive, LiveMotion and PageMaker. I think I should have received a better upgrade price rather than having to pay the same amount of money as someone who only owned Photoshop. That's not really very fair.

The only deal Adobe extended to anyone was the CS2 price for users of CS1. In effect, I already had something along those lines in the first place. Yet I had to pay hundreds more for my CS2 Premium box.

Ahh so. Yes I was in the same boat. I had licensed versions of PS 6, Illustrator 10, PageMaker 6.5, GoLive ?, Acrobat 4, and Streamline 4. I was debating just upgrading portions of it individually and that soon exceeded the cost of just going to CS2.

 

[signage]

Fred, I'm also considering the CS2 suite.

Fred, are you already running the CS1 suite? I am up to CS1 on my Illustrator license... but I'm still on photoshop 6. When I upgrade to the CS2 suite based on my Photoshop license, I will then own the latest illustrator under that license allowing me to sell (& legally transfer licensing for) my existing Illustrator version CS1 (& every upgrade back to v.4) That should go a long ways tword paying for the udgrade.

As Doug stated you can resell your other versions to recoup some of the costs or you can purchase several upgrades to run on your other computers simultaneously.

 

[Arlo Kalon 2.0]

How about a worldwide software purchasing boycott? Ya know - send this email to everyone you know, they do the same, yadda yadda yadda. Nobody buys anything else for at least a year until the software co.'s come begging us with offers that are in line with what they KNOW we really want.

 

[lilb93]

Everyone complains about the price of software, Hell write the program yourself and make a million in the process. Then you can sell 1000 copys and you will have 1000000 cracked copy all over the net. I really do not know many people who actually purchase software.

 

[Bobby H]

Lilb93,

Are you willing to do your job for free? If so, then you get a pass on using as much pirated software as you like.

However, I have not met a single person anywhere that was able to live without a paycheck of some type. Any statement that says we should tolerate software piracy is a statement demanding an entire profession of workers to do their jobs for nothing.

I really do not know many people who actually purchase software.

I purchase my software legitimately. Check the attached photos for a couple examples (my 1993 Photoshop 2.5 box and my 2005 Creative Suite 2 Premium upgrade).

Among future purchases I'm considering:
Adobe Production Suite Premium (with After Effects 7)
Lightwave 3D 9
CorelDRAW X3
Macromedia Studio 8

Sure, my wallet may be a bit lighter for the effort. But paying your dues is part of what makes the difference between a wannabe and a real legitimate graphic artist -not to mention simply running business in an ethical manner.

 

[Fred Weiss]

Everyone complains about the price of software, Hell write the program yourself and make a million in the process. Then you can sell 1000 copys and you will have 1000000 cracked copy all over the net. I really do not know many people who actually purchase software.

Not jumping on you but I do differ with you one that statement. Software piracy and file sharing are real problems with the prices those of us that stay in the licensed software camp have to pay.

FWIW, I'd have to say that I believe the more successful individuals and businesses tend to stay legal in their software acquisitions. Those who are attracted to cracked copies or pirated software, and in general excluding one's self from any responsibility to play by the rules is, to me, the mark of a daytripper, immature, dishonest and an indicator of a less successful existence.