Existing users, 
 Adobe Soundbooth CS4 - 2.0.1Audio editor like Sound Edit 16 & Cool Edit 2000. |
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
Feedback Summary:
| This Version: | |||||
| Overall Rating: | Not rated (0.0) | Features: | Not rated (0.0) | Support: | Not rated (0.0) |
| Ease of Use: | Not rated (0.0) | Quality / Stability: | Not rated (0.0) | Price: | Not rated (0.0) |
Key to Types of Feedback:
Reviews 
Troubleshooting 
Usage Tips 
Developer Notes 
Commentary 
Featured Reviews
Motivations - Version: 1.0b2, 12/28/2006 06:04AM PST
(4 of 5 users found this comment useful)
Billsey
I would have more than one question, but not all for Adobe. It is quite clear to me that more people are considering jumping to Mac now that the new ones are on Intel. Having an Intel build is a no-brainer for one of the companies that encouraged the move to Intel processors in the first place: they are encouraging more people to buy Intel Macs, and they want more current users to "upgrade" to the Intel systems. My problem is that I can't afford it. Perhaps others here can but are simply being stubborn about such a move.
What rankles me about it is that there is no PPC build and (probably therefore) no build for 10.3.9. Not having 10.4.anything, I don't really know what the draw would be for an audio app to cut off 10.3.9. According to my recollection, the big upgrade of the OS in 10.4 was graphics tools, was it not? Because of this, it makes zero sense to me for an audio app to cut off support for 10.3.9 (unless, of course, they've programmed in useless graphics eye-candy that needs 10.4).
For my own part, I have two PPC Macs here: a 9600 that I run OS 9.1 on (and therefore the classic apps that I use), and a G4 Sawtooth running OSX 10.3.9. For my audio recording/editing (of which I do a fair amount) I use Pro-Tools Free on the 9600 to record, and usually to do mix-down. For editing, noise reduction, and effects coloration I use Peak LE 5.2 in conjunction with Sound Soap 2 from BIAS on the G4 under OSX 10.3.9. I do occasionally use Audacity as well for some of its mixing and volume control capabilities.
In conclusion, Adobe is going to need far, far, far more than their name (and they can forget about eye-candy in audio apps) for me to even think about purchasing their product for an adobe-centric price to do a job that can be done using software that in total costs less than $200 US.
Most Recent Replies: View All 2 Replies
- Motivations
more Intel-only perspective - Version: 1.0b2, 12/25/2006 06:32PM PST
(2 of 3 users found this comment useful)
sjk
Especially with all new Macs being Intel-based developing a new Intel-only app seems analogous to developing a new app that's incompatible with the previous OS release(s). Are people who still run 10.3 objecting to Soundbooth's 10.4/10.5 prerequisite as much as those objecting because of the Intel prerequisite? Whether it's hardware and/or software customers who don't have whatever's required are out of luck. Of course the cost of an OS upgrade is much cheaper than purchasing new hardware, but anyway…
And what about customers who already have required hw/sw? Maybe they ought to be claiming developers are "wasting" resources by supporting "obsolete" hw/sw?
Depending on how you want to look at this issue (and many others) there can be reasons for it being both acceptable and objectionable.
And what about customers who already have required hw/sw? Maybe they ought to be claiming developers are "wasting" resources by supporting "obsolete" hw/sw?
Depending on how you want to look at this issue (and many others) there can be reasons for it being both acceptable and objectionable.
The end begins - Version: 1.0b2, 12/21/2006 10:40PM PST
(1 of 3 users found this comment useful)
MatrixPT
This is the one thing I was worried about when I heard Apple was switching over to Intel processors. That companies would start developing ONLY for Intel. Programmed obscolescence for the 'ole PPC. It's a shame Adobe had to start the trend.
Most Recent Replies: View All 7 Replies
- The end begins (2 replies)
