Hi all,
is anyone out there using the original Adobe Creative Suite with the
new OSX Leopard. I see that CS is no longer supported and there may
be some issues. Does it work, I use mainly InDesign, Illustrator and
Photoshop but not often enough to justify the update costs to CS3. If
it doesn’t work what are the alternatives if I upgrade to Leopard.
thanks
Neil
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On 7 Jan 2008, at 14:20, Mr Neil Rowland wrote:
Hi all,
is anyone out there using the original Adobe Creative Suite with the
new OSX Leopard.
I’m not sure about the whole suite, but I know for a fact that
Photoshop 7 is dead in the water, but Illustrator 10 works fine. I
haven’t got round to checking ID CS yet, mainly because I’ve only
installed Leopard for playing about with. Until I update PS7, or find
a worthy replacement (sorry, but Pixelmator isn’t quite there yet),
I’m sticking with the stripy OS for a bit longer. (o:
[OT] I’m not convinced Leopard (variously named on a couple of forums
I visit as Leptard and Leonard) is quite ready for prime time:
perhaps after 10.5.2 I’ll give it a bit more of a run. I’ve got my
copy of The Missing Manual, Leopard Edition, but so far there’s
nothing entirely compelling in 10.5 for me. Except maybe the fun new
emoticons and screen sharing in iChat. Hmm. Well worth the upgrade
cost, I don’t think.
;o)
Heather
“Freeway - Web Design for All”
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 7/1/08 (at 14:46 +0000) Heather Kavanagh said:
so far there’s
nothing entirely compelling in 10.5 for me.
Time Machine.
Oh. My. God.
It may not sound sexy, but having such a totally hassle-free backup
feature integrated should be enough to make anyone who places value
on their data to upgrade.
k
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On 7 Jan 2008, at 15:48, Keith Martin wrote:
Time Machine.
Oh. My. God.
True. However, since I’m not seriously going spotty for a bit, it’s
not something I can really use right now. Besides, I’m going to have
to sort out which of my umpteen external drives I want to devote to
it, which in turn means moving stuff about to free one up of a
suitable size.
Besides, after following our own esteemed Mr Dunning’s trials and
tribulations with TM, I’m approaching it with a sense of extreme
caution.
I’m in one of those moods today ;o)
Heather
“Freeway - Web Design for All”
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
on 7/1/08 15:48, Keith Martin at email@hidden wrote:
Sometime around 7/1/08 (at 14:46 +0000) Heather Kavanagh said:
so far there’s
nothing entirely compelling in 10.5 for me.Time Machine.
Oh. My. God.It may not sound sexy, but having such a totally hassle-free backup
feature integrated should be enough to make anyone who places value
on their data to upgrade.
Yea completely agree, have advised many to go that route, but the big
warning it does not reliably backup Aperture, LightRoom or Entourage
databases so is of dubious use. Maybe Microsoft will in the 2008 Office sort
that one out, but who knows. That leaves Adobe and Apple themselves!
Best wishes Peter
–
================================
Peter Tucker, Oxford UK email@hidden
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Seeing as how these are likely to be large and often changing I recommend
considering excluding these from Time Machine and using some other back up
routine for them.
regards
Brian
Peter Tucker said recently:
on 7/1/08 15:48, Keith Martin at email@hidden wrote:
Sometime around 7/1/08 (at 14:46 +0000) Heather Kavanagh said:
so far there’s
nothing entirely compelling in 10.5 for me.Time Machine.
Oh. My. God.It may not sound sexy, but having such a totally hassle-free backup
feature integrated should be enough to make anyone who places value
on their data to upgrade.Yea completely agree, have advised many to go that route, but the big
warning it does not reliably backup Aperture, LightRoom or Entourage
databases so is of dubious use. Maybe Microsoft will in the 2008 Office sort
that one out, but who knows. That leaves Adobe and Apple themselves!Best wishes Peter
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
on 7/1/08 18:22, Brian Steere at email@hidden wrote:
Seeing as how these are likely to be large and often changing I recommend
considering excluding these from Time Machine and using some other back up
routine for them.
Yup that is currently the only way, to secure your databases, as recommended
by various sources.
It also looks like Entourage 2008 will not cooperate with TM either.
Best wishes Peter
–
================================
Peter Tucker, Oxford UK email@hidden
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 7/1/08 (at 19:36 +0000) Peter Tucker said:
It also looks like Entourage 2008 will not cooperate with TM either.
Sounds like the key is large single database files. Never mind,
Entourage never cooperated with me anyway. 
I’ve yet to find an email app other than Eudora that can cope with my
active and archived mailboxes without slowing to a crawl. Mail faints
dead away when I just mention it…
k
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Personally, I find Mail to be the sole application that is able to
handle my (IMHO) seriously, extremely, arduous email needs:
Entourage choked. Thunderbird gagged. Eudora - well, you get the
picture…
Print and Web Design Services
Visit: http://www.dzynlab.com
Website Hosting Services
Visit: http://www.have-host.com
On Jan-7-08, at 3:28 PM, Keith Martin wrote:
Sometime around 7/1/08 (at 19:36 +0000) Peter Tucker said:
It also looks like Entourage 2008 will not cooperate with TM either.
Sounds like the key is large single database files. Never mind,
Entourage never cooperated with me anyway.
I’ve yet to find an email app other than Eudora that can cope with my
active and archived mailboxes without slowing to a crawl. Mail faints
dead away when I just mention it…k
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 7/1/08 (at 15:49 -0500) James Wilkinson said:
Personally, I find Mail to be the sole application that is able to
handle my (IMHO) seriously, extremely, arduous email needs:
Curious. When I tried Mail it took two days to get part-way through
the import. Then it took 10 minutes to show the inbox, every time.
Totally swamped.
Anyway, I’ve never been a fan of the three-pane UI for email. However
spartan it seems to most people, Eudora’s UI suits me down to the
ground.
k
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Back to the original question… I use CS2 on my 10.5.1 equipped G4 Powerbook, and although things are bit more pokey, CS2 has given me no problems with Photoshop or Illustrator. 10.5 is definitely more of a resource hog.
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
on 8/1/08 07:58, chuckamuck at email@hidden wrote:
Back to the original question… I use CS2 on my 10.5.1 equipped G4
Powerbook, and although things are bit more pokey, CS2 has given me no
problems with Photoshop or Illustrator. 10.5 is definitely more of a resource
hog.
Sounds like I’ve got almost the same setup [1gb, 1.5 MHz], I find CS2 apps
certainly run [ID, IL & PS], but more slowly than under Tiger, which maybe
due wholly to Leopard taking more resources?
It would benefit from more memory, but I’m holding off until after MWSF JIC
there’s something stunning to move to, I hope!
Best wishes Peter
–
================================
Peter Tucker, Oxford UK email@hidden
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 8/1/08 (at 10:27 +0000) Peter Tucker said:
Sounds like I’ve got almost the same setup [1gb, 1.5 MHz], I find CS2 apps
certainly run [ID, IL & PS], but more slowly than under Tiger, which maybe
due wholly to Leopard taking more resources?
I’ve found that Leopard seems to be slightly faster than Tiger, as
long as there’s a liberal amount of RAM installed. It may well need a
little more than Tiger, but it seems to work a little better when it
has it.
k
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On 8 Jan. 2008, 1:17 pm, thatkeith wrote:
Sometime around 8/1/08 (at 10:27 +0000) Peter Tucker said:
Sounds like I’ve got almost the same setup [1gb, 1.5 MHz], I find CS2 apps
certainly run [ID, IL & PS], but more slowly than under Tiger, which maybe
due wholly to Leopard taking more resources?I’ve found that Leopard seems to be slightly faster than Tiger, as
long as there’s a liberal amount of RAM installed. It may well need a
little more than Tiger, but it seems to work a little better when it
has it.k
What I find is that the processor runs MUCH hotter. When this happens, everything slows down. On first cold boot, it runs pretty quick, but once it warms up…it warms UP!
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
on 7/1/08 18:22, Brian Steere at email@hidden wrote:
Seeing as how these are likely to be large and often changing I recommend
considering excluding these from Time Machine and using some other back up
routine for them.
In general, you can’t back up a running ‘real’ database from the
outside in a meaningful way.
By ‘real’ I mean those that have a running process to manage them.
The current state is always in memory, and the disc files are not
consistent unless the database is stopped.
Vast amounts of money get spent by the corporate world to make sure
that databases are down for the minimum time, or not at all, when
backing up. Some database companies sell expensive add on software
that allows you to tell the database to back itself up. Another way
is to use dynamically splittable mirrored discs or expensive disc
arrays that can duplicate the data internally. Then the database only
needs to be down while the split or duplication happens. The copy is
then backed up.
David
–
David Ledger - Freelance Unix Sysadmin in the UK.
HP-UX specialist of hpUG technical user group (www.hpug.org.uk)
email@hidden
www.ivdcs.co.uk
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
David,
I understand the issue of the backups of the running db being next to useless, but why would the backup corrupt the db itself? The impression I have is that if your run TM while you have Aperture open, it will damage the Aperture db. I think I’ve hear similar things about backing up a mail store on a server.
(What I’ve been doing is simply turning TM off while I use Aperture, and I turn it back on after I quit Aperture.)
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Oops, sorry about the typos in that post.
“if you run TM while you have Aperture open”
“I think I’ve heard similar things”
What’s the oops or embarrassed smiley?
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Hmmm. I don’t see one in there. Send me one and I’ll add it.
var smilies = $H({':mrgreen:': 'icon_mrgreen.gif',
':neutral:': 'icon_neutral.gif',
':twisted:': 'icon_twisted.gif',
':arrow:': 'icon_arrow.gif',
':shock:': 'icon_eek.gif',
':smile:': 'icon_smile.gif',
':???:': 'icon_confused.gif',
':cool:': 'icon_cool.gif',
':evil:': 'icon_evil.gif',
':grin:': 'icon_biggrin.gif',
':idea:': 'icon_idea.gif',
':oops:': 'icon_redface.gif',
':razz:': 'icon_razz.gif',
':roll:': 'icon_rolleyes.gif',
':wink:': 'icon_wink.gif',
':cry:': 'icon_cry.gif',
':eek:': 'icon_surprised.gif',
':lol:': 'icon_lol.gif',
':mad:': 'icon_mad.gif',
':sad:': 'icon_sad.gif',
'8-)': 'icon_cool.gif',
'8-O': 'icon_eek.gif',
':-(': 'icon_sad.gif',
':-)': 'icon_smile.gif',
':-?': 'icon_confused.gif',
':-D': 'icon_biggrin.gif',
':-P': 'icon_razz.gif',
':-o': 'icon_surprised.gif',
':-x': 'icon_mad.gif',
':-|': 'icon_neutral.gif',
';-)': 'icon_wink.gif',
'8)': 'icon_cool.gif',
'8O': 'icon_eek.gif',
':(': 'icon_sad.gif',
':)': 'icon_smile.gif',
':D': 'icon_biggrin.gif',
':P': 'icon_razz.gif',
':o': 'icon_surprised.gif',
':x': 'icon_mad.gif',
':|': 'icon_neutral.gif',
';)': 'icon_wink.gif',
':!:': 'icon_exclaim.gif',
':?:': 'icon_question.gif'});
Walter
On Jan 8, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Joe Muscara wrote:
What’s the oops or embarrassed smiley?
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 8/1/08 (at 17:35 -0500) Joe Muscara said:
What’s the oops or embarrassed smiley?
<:-o
:-?
perhaps?
k
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
With my Entourage database I drag and drop copy the file to a similar
location on my other Mac. Then open Entourage and the mails are up to date
as of the Powerbook copy.
If my network were wired I might leave it in Time Machine but otherwise it
would be over a Gb every time Time Machine checked. So it makes sense to do
that another way. Thats all.
I have used utilities that backed up mails to text etc. But to make a backup
of an existing running database would want something that can do live
synchronizing. Such as .Mac does.
I realize I am talking the little man here. I appreciate glimpses into
corporate mechanisms but know little of that world.
all the best
Brian
David Ledger said recently:
on 7/1/08 18:22, Brian Steere at email@hidden wrote:
Seeing as how these are likely to be large and often changing I recommend
considering excluding these from Time Machine and using some other back up
routine for them.In general, you can’t back up a running ‘real’ database from the
outside in a meaningful way.By ‘real’ I mean those that have a running process to manage them.
The current state is always in memory, and the disc files are not
consistent unless the database is stopped.Vast amounts of money get spent by the corporate world to make sure
that databases are down for the minimum time, or not at all, when
backing up. Some database companies sell expensive add on software
that allows you to tell the database to back itself up. Another way
is to use dynamically splittable mirrored discs or expensive disc
arrays that can duplicate the data internally. Then the database only
needs to be down while the split or duplication happens. The copy is
then backed up.David
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options