[mojuba]

I'm going to skip Photoshop for an entirely different reason.

All Adobe products gradually became classical bloatware over the past years. One or two minor features, or otherwise just a couple of crappy-buzzword-features and you get a binary twice as bigger as the previous one.

When you realize they are doing that just because they need to improve sales, you feel betrayed. So honestly, today I feel betrayed by Adobe and I'm going to dump Photoshop, Dreamweaver and Acrobat for something else, forever. Amen.

[petervidani]

I could maybe see this argument holding up a few years prior, but I think CS3 has had a remarkable influence on my workflow (compared to say, CS2). Having run the last 2 versions on the same Intel machine, there was immediate differences to note with the workspace and rendering times. I mean just compare the time it takes to load Photoshop and it justifies the upgrade.

I will be curious to see how lean the product stays when as the updates continue to roll in.

[bprater]

I've used every version of Photoshop since 2.5 (thats back in the day before layers existed!), and I've consistently been more happy with each version that comes out.

Often, it's very simple subtle things that improve my workflow, like layer folders or improved styles or non-destructive layers.

[ardit33]

I think you probably can be classified as a fanboi. I don't mean it in the insulting way; simply you have been using it for so long, that you are used to it totally, and comfortable with it, and any other alternative would be considered non good enough.

People that have been using it just for a while, and used a lot of other tools, can give a more balanced opinion to it.

For me, I have CS2 in my computer, and I almost never use it. Fireworks has been enough for %90 of my needs.

[aristus]

I've been using it since the 2.5 days as well, when it came on two floppies and a stone tablet. I agree, mostly, but 5.0, 5.5 and 6.0 Win were crap.

[kyro]

What will you use instead?

[mojuba]

There's GIMP, but I don't see a lot of enthusiasm on the Net about it. I think I'll try to find something small and simple that suits preliminary web site modeling and is capable of producing web formats - png, jpeg and gif - out of the slices of the basic graphical model. In fact GIMP may be OK for doing just that.

[DougBTX]

For prototyping, you might want to try something more focused on vector drawings than just pixels, i.e. Illustrator vs. Photoshop. I've not found any great open source vector image editors yet though. In the market for one though.

[bct]

Inkscape's the big one.

[josefresco]

Fireworks: vector based, built for websites and web apps. Unfortunately it's from Adobe now too, so you deal with bloat that Macromedia wasn't very fond of.

[ardit33]

I still use Fireworks 8. Works like a champ.

Most advanced features of Photoshop, are better left to the professional designers. If you are using them, then you probably are wasting too much time prototyping.

Fireworks (or Gimp, or paint.net), or Visio are good enough.

[bkbleikamp]

Agreed. I have a few features in Photoshop that I use regularly, everything else I use sparingly if at all. Chances are they won't change my favorite features and the ones they add won't improve my work as a web designer.

Photoshop CS3 was a nice improvement because it was a universal binary, but I doubt i will be upgrading to CS4 when it is released.

[dcurtis]

What if CS4 is GPU-accelerated and offers the same (or more) performance as the jump to universal binary? Would that be an incentive to buy the upgrade?

I'm curious about how slow people feel Photoshop is; it works really quickly for me doing web-based stuff at 1 or 2 megapixels. Does it slow down working with 90 megapixel 300dpi images?