Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: CNET: "Adobe users must pay for security upgrades"  (Read 14324 times)
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #40 on: May 14, 2012, 05:51:50 PM »
ReplyReply

2 days ago I posted the updated link confirming they were working on 5.x patches...
Logged

shotworldwide
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #41 on: May 15, 2012, 09:36:08 AM »
ReplyReply

2 days ago I posted the updated link confirming they were working on 5.x patches...

Please, would you tell me what patches for 5.x have to do with vulnerabilities in CS3/CS4? Does it mean that older versions of Photoshop are secure enough? I am sorry, I do not understand your reply …

Regards, Filip

--------------------------
http://shotworldwide.com
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #42 on: May 15, 2012, 07:00:59 PM »
ReplyReply

2 days ago I posted the updated link confirming they were working on 5.x patches...

Indeed you did, but the point is that perhaps they should do more. Check this for example:http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/app-security/240000397; the most pertinent paragraph being:

"It's encouraging to see Apple has not left users of this older version [talking about Leopard - OSX 5.x] of the Mac OS X operating system completely out in the cold when it comes to protecting against the latest threats," said Graham Cluley, senior technology consultant at free Mac antivirus maker Sophos, in a blog post. "Clearly they realize that it's not good for the Apple Mac's image if older computers connected to the Internet are harboring malware that could cause problems for others in the Mac community."

He's reflecting exactly the factor I raised in posts above - it is a problem of "externalities" affecting potentially all users.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #43 on: May 15, 2012, 07:19:02 PM »
ReplyReply

My reply is that a lot of people seemingly don't read the links provided by people and continued to complain about the issue and then suddenly, 2 days later, said "oh, wow, they're fixing 5.x" because they saw it on their favourite tech blog.

It is far better to go direct to the source and read the releases from Adobe.
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #44 on: May 15, 2012, 07:20:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Yup. All true. :-)
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
daws
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


« Reply #45 on: May 16, 2012, 04:56:00 AM »
ReplyReply

My reply is that a lot of people seemingly don't read the links provided by people and continued to complain about the issue and then suddenly, 2 days later, said "oh, wow, they're fixing 5.x" because they saw it on their favourite tech blog.

It is far better to go direct to the source and read the releases from Adobe.

In fact it would be far better if Adobe's defenders realized that knee-jerk defense of the company on public forums is the worst kind of defense a company can have.

Its belated announcement of security patches for CS5x notwithstanding, Adobe is at this moment being pilloried in the social media for displaying precisely the kind of attitude I see here: the bristling at the very suggestion that the company could be acting wrongly, and the dismissive, condescending tone at any customer who suggests so.

For a company that isn't suffering from customer relation issues, such defense is not needed. For one that is, such defense only worsens the perception that the company is neither listening, no cares.


Logged
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #46 on: May 16, 2012, 06:20:54 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm not defending them - I'm merely providing factual information and commenting on my concern that people get upset for things which were clarified days ago.

The initial release was either extremely poorly written or bad management.

Again, the name calling (apologist, defender, etc), is a very bad reflection on those who stoop to such levels.
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #47 on: May 16, 2012, 07:34:03 AM »
ReplyReply


Again, the name calling (apologist, defender, etc), is a very bad reflection on those who stoop to such levels.

I agree with this completely. Uncalled for, and adds nothing to - indeed detracts from - what should be a straightforward factual discussion of a situation.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1163



WWW
« Reply #48 on: May 16, 2012, 09:48:26 AM »
ReplyReply

In fact it would be far better if Adobe's defenders realized that knee-jerk defense of the company on public forums is the worst kind of defense a company can have.

Its belated announcement of security patches for CS5x notwithstanding, Adobe is at this moment being pilloried in the social media for displaying precisely the kind of attitude I see here: the bristling at the very suggestion that the company could be acting wrongly, and the dismissive, condescending tone at any customer who suggests so.

For a company that isn't suffering from customer relation issues, such defense is not needed. For one that is, such defense only worsens the perception that the company is neither listening, no cares.




And really there are no facts backing up how wide spread the amount of bristling is going on caused by all this attention to Adobe's actions whether through the media or online social networking which I would assess toward any subject discussed this way.

Just because someone says they heard/read it here, there, online and from their neighborhood computer club doesn't make it wide spread and a world consensus.

Fervor starts by feeding on itself. Facts become secondary after that happens.
Logged
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #49 on: May 16, 2012, 07:57:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Fervor starts by feeding on itself. Facts become secondary after that happens.

Very true.
Logged

shotworldwide
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #50 on: May 17, 2012, 03:18:16 AM »
ReplyReply

And really there are no facts backing up how wide spread the amount of bristling is going on caused by all this attention to Adobe's actions whether through the media or online social networking which I would assess toward any subject discussed this way.

Just because someone says they heard/read it here, there, online and from their neighborhood computer club doesn't make it wide spread and a world consensus.

Fervor starts by feeding on itself. Facts become secondary after that happens.
For those of you who wish to learn something more about Adobe's customer service and facts please visit Adobe's Photoshop General Discussion:

http://forums.adobe.com/message/4414347#4414347

This discussion is not about security issues but this is just another proof of Adobe's customer ignorance. And I also agree that "knee-jerk defense of the company on public forums is the worst kind of defense a company can have."

Regards, Filip

-------------------------
http://shotworldwide.com
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 03:20:06 AM by shotworldwide » Logged
Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1163



WWW
« Reply #51 on: May 17, 2012, 09:37:43 AM »
ReplyReply

For those of you who wish to learn something more about Adobe's customer service and facts please visit Adobe's Photoshop General Discussion:

http://forums.adobe.com/message/4414347#4414347

This discussion is not about security issues but this is just another proof of Adobe's customer ignorance. And I also agree that "knee-jerk defense of the company on public forums is the worst kind of defense a company can have."

Regards, Filip

-------------------------
http://shotworldwide.com

Again, that is your opinion. It is not fact nor is it a consensus. That link to the Adobe discussion is just users of their software (not Adobe employee customer service reps) talking about their opinion and feelings toward how a company decides to conduct business.  

I'm not a shill for Adobe by any long shot. I finally plunked down my $133 CS3 to CS5 upgrade, installed the software and don't even use it because of the learning curve involved familiarizing myself with all the added features, placement and redesign of tools and that confounded workspace tool palette "tabby thingy" arranging I have to keep clicking on to get it to collapse and stay out of the way. I just got used to how CS3 deals with this.

I get the impression Adobe is just trying to force photographers to move to Lightroom by irritating the hell out of them with each Photoshop upgrade redesign, but that's my frustration centric opinion that can't be proven that it is shared by every owner of CS5.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 09:40:13 AM by tlooknbill » Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #52 on: May 17, 2012, 09:53:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Again, that is your opinion. It is not fact nor is it a consensus. That link to the Adobe discussion is just users of their software (not Adobe employee customer service reps) talking about their opinion and feelings toward how a company decides to conduct business.  

I'm not a shill for Adobe by any long shot. I finally plunked down my $133 CS3 to CS5 upgrade, installed the software and don't even use it because of the learning curve involved familiarizing myself with all the added features, placement and redesign of tools and that confounded workspace tool palette "tabby thingy" arranging I have to keep clicking on to get it to collapse and stay out of the way. I just got used to how CS3 deals with this.

I get the impression Adobe is just trying to force photographers to move to Lightroom by irritating the hell out of them with each Photoshop upgrade redesign, but that's my frustration centric opinion that can't be proven that it is shared by every owner of CS5.

Adobe customer service is a very mixed bag. Sometimes the experience is fine, other times it can be very frustrating. It depends on the issue and the people you get to speak to. Shouldn't be that way, but that's life, and especially given the lack of competition, it's good that we have the internet to help put them on their toes - best done in a constructive and positive manner I should add.

Yes, when software features are changed there is a learning curve. The issue isn't the fact there is a learning curve, but whether the feature change is of a nature that the time committed to the learning curve is worthwhile. Sometimes the people who design these things are more visionary than the users who get too comfortable with a set way of doing things, and after a while we come to appreciate that changes we thought were trivial can indeed be quite useful. Again, it depends; but having to learn something new is not a defect of application development policy. Let me leave it at that.

Now tell me WHY Adobe should want to push their customers into a low-priced application at the expense of a high-priced application? Apart from the fact that such a strategy makes no obvious business sense, to suggest this is what they are doing perhaps derives from a lack of knowledge about the inner workings of the company, what the various groups are aiming for and within what overall corporate strategy.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
shotworldwide
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #53 on: May 17, 2012, 12:11:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Again, that is your opinion. It is not fact nor is it a consensus. That link to the Adobe discussion is just users of their software (not Adobe employee customer service reps) talking about their opinion and feelings toward how a company decides to conduct business.  

I'm not a shill for Adobe by any long shot. I finally plunked down my $133 CS3 to CS5 upgrade, installed the software and don't even use it because of the learning curve involved familiarizing myself with all the added features, placement and redesign of tools and that confounded workspace tool palette "tabby thingy" arranging I have to keep clicking on to get it to collapse and stay out of the way. I just got used to how CS3 deals with this.

I get the impression Adobe is just trying to force photographers to move to Lightroom by irritating the hell out of them with each Photoshop upgrade redesign, but that's my frustration centric opinion that can't be proven that it is shared by every owner of CS5.

I mean that there is a link and few screenshots with highlighted text (with red color) and it should be a pretty clear fact. I did not mean that this discussion is a fact by itself.

Regards, Filip

-------------------------
http://shotworldwide.com
Logged
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #54 on: May 17, 2012, 12:24:04 PM »
ReplyReply

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2000-03-19/

Cheesy, especially the last panel Cheesy
Logged

daws
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


« Reply #55 on: May 18, 2012, 02:24:00 AM »
ReplyReply


ROFL!! Ain't it the truth.  Grin

(For a bonus laugh, look at the date of that Dilbert strip!)

Plus ça change, plus ça meme chose.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 02:25:33 AM by daws » Logged
Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1163



WWW
« Reply #56 on: May 18, 2012, 11:41:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Now tell me WHY Adobe should want to push their customers into a low-priced application at the expense of a high-priced application? Apart from the fact that such a strategy makes no obvious business sense, to suggest this is what they are doing perhaps derives from a lack of knowledge about the inner workings of the company, what the various groups are aiming for and within what overall corporate strategy.

Mark, it's just an impression expressed as humorous hyperbole in ribbing a giant (Adobe) we've all come to love because of all the magical qualities in their software and the fact they really don't seem to want to grind our bones to make their bread regardless of what the Dilbert cartoon implies. Gotta' love the Dilbert.

But if someone is going to redesign the interface of software their client base has been using for at least two decades as some form of Steve Jobs "Sell them what they don't know they want" strategy, they'ld better make it clear what it is we want because currently it still takes a lot of my time getting what I know I want out of my Raw images and being able to print on demand business cards to my $70 inkjet in addition to quick processing of those Raws for uploading to the web. Right now I got my workspace and methods nailed down, understandable and straightforward.

Doing all that in CS5 I'm like...uuh...OK...what the hell, what's that little do hicky thing, why do my tool palette icons look so odd and a bit smaller and what's that extra stuff when I option or control click on it. It wasn't there before. Why does Bridge take forever caching previews with that constantly spinning icon in the corner in filmstrip view mode? It doesn't do this in CS3.

I have never had any problems with Adobe customer service because I never call them. I usually figure out another way of doing something as a work around because as we all know Adobe has engineered their software to allow anyone to get the same results doing it a dozen or so different ways. What else explains all the interface clutter and nested dialog boxes. Adobe knows what we want and that is to make the best looking image possible rendered in the quickest, easiest way.

Why would I want security opening someone else's images? I'm not interested in someone elses images. I'm only interested mine. You work at an ad agency or graphic design shop? Why are you opening images from strange places when they should be from copyright protected known sources? I'm trying to figure out where the boogie man is in all this and who are the ones afraid of him.
Logged
shotworldwide
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #57 on: May 23, 2012, 07:38:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Why would I want security opening someone else's images? I'm not interested in someone elses images. I'm only interested mine. You work at an ad agency or graphic design shop? Why are you opening images from strange places when they should be from copyright protected known sources? I'm trying to figure out where the boogie man is in all this and who are the ones afraid of him.
If you are busy you don't have time to think about everything and you can accidentally open infected file. Professional studios are dealing with many files on daily basis and the risk could be huge here …
 
Regards, Filip

--------------------------------------------------
http://shotworldwide.com & http://photoapps.info
Logged
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #58 on: May 23, 2012, 06:03:36 PM »
ReplyReply

If you are busy you don't have time to think about everything and you can accidentally open infected file. Professional studios are dealing with many files on daily basis and the risk could be huge here …

How many pro studios opening many files on a daily basis are still using CS4 or earlier?
Logged

shotworldwide
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #59 on: May 24, 2012, 02:52:16 AM »
ReplyReply

How many pro studios opening many files on a daily basis are still using CS4 or earlier?
Have you ever been abroad? You have a lot of countries which aren't so rich and people living there are forced to pay much more for Adobe's products than US customers.
But internet is without borders among countries.

Regards, Filip

---------------------------------------------------
http://shotworldwide.com & http://photoapps.info
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad