Did you come here looking for solutions? There are plenty of very knowledgable people here who would be happy to help. But all you’ve done is barge into a user-to-user forum and rant at people no different than you–users.
This is not an official pipeline to Adobe, although there are several Adobe employees active here.
Now, for your own good, why not start again and maybe someone help.
I’ll try the keyboard thing…there are known issues with some keyboards that require the drivers to be reinstalled. The only other issue is with cracked versions of the software. I certainly hope that after a rant like yours that it isn’t your case.
Bob
Wondering if you’re using a cracked version. There were keyboard shortcut issues from people who were using bootleg Photoshop CS. I’ve not experienced any of the other issues you have, short of it taking a little longer to load than previous versions.
As for ACDSee 6, it should have not been rushed to release and they are aware of it. There’s a patch coming out next week that fixes most of the bugs.
Larry Berman
I am only one of millions of examples of why people pirate software…
Isn’t this an admission of using pirated software?
Yes, I’m sure the "crack" has nothing at all to do with any of the problems he is having. :rolleyes:
LenHewitt "CTRL Key does not work in Photoshop CS" 11/15/03 2:18am </cgi-bin/webx?50>
Giving Edison the benefit of doubt, he’s only saying that the problems he is having are such that if one knew they could anticipate such problems, they’d more likely seek out a pirated copy of PS than pay for the product. Of course, the proper approach is to install a fully-functional demo and determine if the application is going to work for you or not. If not, don’t buy it, and let the manufacturer know what happened so they can attempt a fix.
If I’d been smart, and patient, I’d have waited until a PS CS Demo was available before purchasing it, seeing how I’ve been unable to isolate the cause of it randomly aborting on my system. But, I was anxious to upgrade so as to work on PhotoBars CS. Fortunately, that effort has covered the cost of the upgrade but it sure would be nice if PS CS was working more reliably.
Regards,
Daryl
I think that a fair poll would vote Photoshop 6.0 as the "Buggiest" new release. The 6.01 update soon fixed the problems.
🙂
Brent
I say SCREW U ADOBE, and to all the other companies that follow this practice! I am only one of millions of examples of why people pirate software, it’s because the damn things almost never work and it would be a tremendous waste of the public’s money to spend on YOUR JUNK!
Edison seems to have stumbled into approving a "pirate’s code" logical sequitor failure here.
Admit for argument’s sake that software companies sometimes / often act unethically or irresponsibly and do so for purely selfish reasons and really don’t give a damn about the customer.
Therefore it’s OK for people to walk off the job on their personal ethics and act like thieves.
Really?
True, patience is a hard thing to come by. (I know of which I speak having wasted over 10 grand on software which ended up being useless because I was being used as a beta-tester / customer and because I was being played for a sucker to false advertising. The other 10 grand I spent bought software that more-or-less performed in a way resembling the advertised claims. All of this on truly "poverty-level" income!)
Still, now that you can try before you buy, you’re for the most part protected. The worst you’ll probably get into via this route is having to wait for an update to come through.
So, how about separating issues: a) corporate ethics; b) personal ethics.
Dharmamitra
Larry: Do you know for a fact that ACDSEE 6 is bugged??
I’m installing WinXP on a different hard drive at the moment, because I thought my Windows system was corrupt – as ACDSee 6 won’t even open, let alone crash!
(I’m also having SCSI Scanner lockups (HP 7450c) – but I’m sure it was working fine before I installed Norton Internet Security 2004 and Creative Suite). I had been wondering if it might have been two activation systems conflicting.
J.
Hi Jason, e-mail me off list:
I beta test ACDSee.
Larry
I really really would not advise anybody to infect his system with Norton software. Other than the basic virus scanner maybe.9 out of ten times friends of mine hade sudden problems with their system, it was a Norton mess-up 🙂
I have yet to understand why the Norton suites are so popular.Nasty stuff.
I have yet to understand why the Norton suites are so popular.
Because they USED to be best of breed applications. They’re running on name recognition and the association of that name with quality products. To quote Bob Dylan, "The times, they are a changin’."
that must have been a looong looong time ago 🙂
suprisingly, no. not really that long ago. (Or gosh! Am I getting that old?!!) : )
Peter Norton sold his name and retired at least ten years ago. It’s been slipping since then. I avoid automatic trash can protection, automatic virus checking… automatic anything at all–don’t let anything run unless you ask it to–and it’s reliable. Of course, it loads some stuff regardless, so you have to go to the Registry to fix that. And their 2004 release added [De]activation, so I’m stuck at 2003.
Try NOD32 (www.nod32.com). Great AV software, low on system resources, good scanning engine, frequent updates and very flexible as far as configuration is concerned. Norton used to be good back in the mid 90’s. Their "home user" version is already overpriced and to get any functionality at all you have to go for their "professional" version which is double the cost of other good scanners.
I agree Norton’s stuff can really make a mess. I dropped Norton Utilities, Norton System Works, etc. a long time ago. I currently use Anti-Virus and don’t have any problems with that. But, I am also looking at alternatives to that. Right now I am testing Panda Anti-Virus. Too early to say about it.
The other thing that kills me about Symantec’s stuff is that their upgrades are jokes. They never add anything new that is worth a dang. Norton System Works is supposed be disk utilities, but have they ever adding anything for CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-R/+R, DVD-RW/+RW no not a thing. There stuff is quickly getting to the point is is irrelevant.
Robert
Re ACDSee 6.0: won’t even run, let alone crash, on one of my systems. Several e-mails to support concluded that there is an incompatibility between v 6.0 and the Apple iPod software….go figure!!
I also had a huge HP SCSI scanner slowdown/refusal to work issue after I installed PS CS. The scanner would not work properly in any TWAIN application. Now that I have reconfigured the scanner to use USB it at least works properly in all apps except CS — I have to scan in PS 7.0.1!!
I’ve been using SystemSuite for several years, not only a great, up-to-date AV but a myriad of other small utilities that are great, overall system resources. Haven’t been able to find the latest version up here in Canada yet, but there is complete support for the version I have.
I love the logic here:
I am only one of millions of examples of why people pirate software, it’s because the damn things almost never work and it would be a tremendous waste of the public’s money to spend on YOUR JUNK!
So… people pirate software because it is buggy? And you rationalize that you’ll download, install, and use buggy software, because if it worked well, then you’d pay for it?
Further, you use a hacked version, that the script kiddies screwed up (documented no shortcut keys), and you blame Adobe?
With that logic, you deserve to use buggy software, Einstein.
Avoiding the cracked software thing which most of you seem to be stuck on yet my reading of his post didn’t say his version of CS was cracked… Just that he didn’t feel he should have to pay for this crap whne it doesn’t work completly.
Anyway, my version of CS is legal and I have "most" of his problems. The ones outside of CS I do not have. However, all my shortcuts work. I really feel this should have been beta tested more. I agree that this is the biggest version since I have been using PS (since version 5.) I do not understand how companies can release a product that is so buggy. I guess that is how Microsoft got so big? I guess a working product, as described, is more than we can expect.
What if the money I used to pay for the software was buggy? I am sure Adobe would be upset as should we.
I really do like Adobe, but after getting Photoshop Album (HUGGHHHH!) and now this, I feel hesitent when people ask me about upgrading. Hell, Adobe basically asked me to upgrade to get Photoshop Album working. Of course I said no, so I have a program that simply does not work from Adobe. So much for helping out Adobe by buying a version 1 software. I feel the legal part of his complaint.
For the record – I haven’t had one problem with PSCS. Every question I’ve had has been answered. No crashes, no freezes and it loads reasonably quickly. I’m cuttin’ and pastin’ and droppin’ things from other programs. I’m zoomin’ and resizin’ and croppin’. Get the message?
Illustrator CS though refuses to open sometimes and I get a CTD after an error message akin to "Cannot Open" but it fires up the very next attempt – this started I think, immediately after I set up some palettes for a "preset" type of workspace and I have no idea how to get back to a "default" setting. I’ll have to post that elsewhere to see why.
Adam.
there are a few minor issues that I’ve seen, nothing too major though.
(chris – have you seen my linked shape layer thread on the Mac side?)
I’ll third that. Best version ever. Zooms on both my machines. My only complaint is the apparently unacknowledged adjustment layer file size bug.
"unacknowledged adjustment layer file size bug"
With what – 8bit or 16bit files?
Mick – we’ve seen lots of misunderstandings about layers and file size, but no bugs.
Chris, there is definitely a bug. File sizes swell by 100% until they are resaved. I have explained it before and I am happy to do again if anybody wants to listen. I am an experienced PS user since V3 on Mac and I also have a lot of experience in scientific research. I am not imagining this and I am not one of find something not working on my machine and it’s a bug brigade. I’ve found a real bug.
Mick – again, we haven’t found any such problem. There are things that users haven’t fully understood, but we haven’t found any problems like that.
Mick,
Chris, there is definitely a bug.
You’ll need to set out the specific steps required to see this happen.
I’ve been using CS since for best part of 10 months on both PC and Mac and whilst the file size with an adjustment layers in 16 bit mode appears to result in a significant increase in file size it is not a bug. I can save these files, reopen, edit, resave, etc and so long as I don’t add/remove layers or resize there is no change in file size. What I get here on both platforms is exactly as it was described to me and other testers.
Ian
Well I have seen this behaviour on two machines. Any new image (8 bit scan, digital camera file), add a levels adjustment layer and the file size ON DISK doubles when the file is saved relative to the size it would be if there was no adjustment layer.
Resave the file (either as a new file or overwrite the existing file) and the file size on disk goes back to normal (half the previous value approx). This is definitely not normal and it certainly doesn’t happen in V6 which is the last version I have. Once a file has been saved over itself, this behaviour no longer occurs.
Finally, if you save one of the swollen files as a JPEG say level 6, it holds the swollen file sixze in comparison to the same pixel size JPEG saved from the unswollen version. This has serious repercussions for saving files for web use. I’ve had to record an action to resave all my psds to halve the filesize before making jpegs.
I have Maximise Compatility off and previews on by the way.
I’m not mad. I’m seeing this constantly and it’s not correct behaviour. It’s a pure and simple observation with nothing difficult for a user to understand.
PS. I’m happy to send Chris or Ian an example file if you want.
Mick – yes, that is expected when maxize compatibility is enabled.
Resave without maximize compatibility, and the size goes down (but not for 16 bit – long story).
If it didn’t happen in v6, then that must be a bug in v6.
And there is no way that adjustment layers would have any effect on JPEG file sizes. Metadata – maybe, profiles – yes, but not layers.
Chris, I have Maximise Compatiblity disabled. I never use it.
The bottom line here is that I have two PSD files, exactly the same pixel size, each with one levels adjustment layer and one is twice the size on disk as the other. Now can you tell me how it is possible to actually create two psd files which are exactly the same in every way but one is twice the size on disk as the other.
I’ve just created these files by the way and I can do it at will on this machine. It’s definitely not right.
Mick – I don’t know how it happens on your system.
Mick,
TIFF or PSD?
I’ve tried both and on both platforms and can’t replicate all that you describe. My file size with PSD format with an adjustment layer is only a few KB larger than the flat file. The TIFF format version is double the size of the flattened version but no matter how I resave it remains this size. TIFF files with layers always include a flattened version within the image (for compatibility with other applciations). This might explain your doubled file size, but I’m too tired to figure how resaving it removes the composite.
Ok Chris. Looks like you are suggesting that it is my system only. The system is nearly new and I have two WinXP OS installed on two separate partitions and it happens on both. It also happens on my laptop but not so consistently. And I’ve seen at least one other report of the same on the forum around Christmas time. So it’s a bug on three systems then. I can work around it. It’s annoying but as long as I know it’s happening I can deal with it. My purpose in bringing this up was not to criticise but to help other users and Adobe.
Ian, the behaviour you describe is what I would consider normal. An adjustment layer should add a tiny overhead, not double the file size. They are 8-bit PSDs not TIFFs. Fresh from my scanner. I’m tired too. Have a good sleep.
Anyway, my version of CS is legal and I have "most" of his problems. The ones outside of CS I do not have. However, all my shortcuts work.
Different then. But if ones shortcuts don’t work, and it’s not due to a third party driver, then one has the crack – in which case, the bitching and moaning about buggy software falls on deaf ears.
Different then. But if ones shortcuts don’t work, and it’s not due to a third party driver, then one has the crack – in which case, the bitching and moaning about buggy software falls on deaf ears.
What? The only part of this that I understood was that Adobe doesn’t care if the software is buggy because they will not listen?
As far as the other thing you mention, how can you deduce that he has cracked software? Granted he should have not used that as an arguement to entice better code, but he said that because of this he should not have to pay for the software untill it is fixed. However, I still have problems with CS, none with PS7 and all my software is legal and I tried a fresh install of my machine with only winXP sp1 and CS and the prblems were still there. Cracked or not, problems within PS are very similar.
Okay, bug free software is unlikely, but they should not fall on deaf ears. I am living with it, but it would be sad that I should just blindly accept this level of code.
Malmeel – what the @#%@#% are you talking about?
Boils down to my software is buggy and slow. It is not cracked… nuff said.
I just ordered CS last Monday and it arrived on Tuesday. A day and a half to receive it from Adobe. That’s the only slowdown I’ve had. All the shortcuts I’ve tried work flawlessly. And this is just a little HP laptop.
Although all my stuff works fine I do have the file size doubling. 4.52mb from a scan then add a curves layer and it’s 9.2mb. File compatibility is turned on. When I open the large file it opens at 4.52mb. Re-save it and it doubles again. Not a big problem but strange.
Gary, can you turn maximize compatibility off and try this with a fresh file but look at the file sizes on disk with Win Explorer not in the PS status bar.
I use CS for over a month now. The only thing i found out is that the file browser sometimes works crappy. The rest works perfect and just as fast as PS 7.0
I just double checked and I do have the file swelling problem. If I save as a psd file with ps compatability off it was a 25mb file as shown by windows explorer. Add a curves layer and it saves at 50mb. Saving as a tif was even stranger. 16mb for the file and 46mb with the curves layer. Not a big problem for me just a little quirk.
Interesting Gary. At least it’s not just me and the other guy who posted a while back. I never did think it was either. My personal opinion is that this is likely to be a lot more widespread because a lot of people will simply not notice this. But it will certainly use up disk space at double the rate it would normally.
Mick,
I now see what your talking about – Mac and PC platforms.
Please try the following and report what you get:
In Photoshop Prefs set PSD compatibility to "Ask"
Open an image and apply an adjustment layer
Choose Save As and after giving the file a name click OK
A dialog will appear (Photoshop Format Options) and on the top left is a tick box – uncheck it and click OK. This should save the image without the embedded flattened compatibility image. It does on my system. My guess at this point is that the NEVER option in Photoshop prefs isn’t functioning correctly.
Buggy _HOW_?
Slow is probably because you haven’t yet properly adjusted your memory slider percentage yet.
-Scott
That works. Thanks! 6.29mb and 6.41mb with the curves layer. The never option isn’t working. Wonder if Adobe knows and how do you tell them anyway.
Gary,
The post immediately yours IS by Scott Byer – he is one of the Photoshop Engineers. If they didn’t know they had a problem they do now.
Mick, Chris makes a very clear distinction between "bug" and "expected (by us) behavior", so don’t take it personally.
Yes, being able to add an adjustment layer in Photoshop 6 without taking a lage hit in file size was probably a bug in that version. There’s always a tricky balance between trying to save disk space and trying to have a robust, more compatible file format. There may also be some confusion as to when "Maximize Compatibility" kicks in and applies.
But I am having trouble reproducng the issue. Any time I save an 8-bit file with an Curves layer, I’m getting the expected (not double) size. Is it a particular adjustmenu type your are seeing the problem with? Do you have Maximize set to "ask", and could you have hit return instictively to the ask dialog not noticing that the check mark got checked? Could it be that other edits were made to the file that affected the compressability?
-Scott
Scott. I’ve only had CS for a week now. I set compatability to never, ask, and always. It doubles the file size (even more than that if .tif) when you add an adjustment layer. I added a curves layer with no adjustments to it or no other adjustment. If set to "ask" and you uncheck the compatability box it adds just a bit to the file size as I’d expect. It works this way consistantly. I’m using an HP laptop, XP home with a gig of ram.
Scott,
The problems comes and goes. After I tried the Ask option and found the file size to be correct I went back to Never. For a few images and saves Never also produced normal sized files. Then something changed and and it was was back to double the size. I’m not sure that I’ve done anything different, but at some point when Never is selected CS decides it doesn’t want to behave properly. I’ll try figure what if anything I did different. However, there is something odd about the Never option.
Ian
I’m relieved you are seeing this, not because I want it to be buggy but because I know my observations are valid and I felt I was being fobbed off as another user who doesn’t understand how the program is supposed to work. I reported this about two months back in the main bug thread and it was just ignored. You are one of the real heavyweights and Adobe will definitely take what you say seriously. Thanks for having a look. Much appreciated. I’ll give what you suggest a try later on this evening and report back. From current perspective, there does seem to be a real bug (another word for isn’t functioning correctly) in the Never option.
Scott
Thanks for having a look at this as well. I have Max Compatibility permanently off and always work this way. I never see any extra dialog. I haven’t done sufficiently detailed checking to say which adjusment layers cause this but it certainly happens every time with levels and curves. I really don’t believe the idea that 6 was buggy because it didn’t show this behaviour. Neither did 4 which was my previous version. I don’t have 7 so haven’t been able to check.I can understand Chris’s reactions to the extent that there are so many supposed bugs reported here that do turn out to be user generated. However, I am confident that this is not the case here. Like I said, my only purpose in bringing this up again was to help out, not to have a blast at Adobe.
I reported this about two months back in the main bug thread and it was just ignored.
It only seems that way, but the engineers do tend to try and replicate the problem, but there’s only so much time available. Generally it’s us the user who doesn’t help matters by simply crying bug – we need to be a lot more specific about the steps needed to create a problem. We also need to identify any other quirky behavior surrounding the issue.
You are one of the real heavyweights and Adobe will definitely take what you say seriously.
Me a heavyweight – jeez that’s a laugh 😉 If I stand sideways on I become invisible 😉
OK Ian. Exactly as you say. Changing to Ask and unticking the check box gives the expected file size. On a small 600 pixel wide PSD, the size without levels adjustment laye is 677 kb, with adjustment layer using the method above it is 726, leaving the check box ticked it is 1341 kb.
The same file with Never in prefs is 1341. Saving over or resaving the same file makes it 726.
The numbers are exactly the same – strongly suggesting that there is definitely something wrong with the Max Compatibility option. I’ll see what happens now when I go back to the Never.
I’m a bit 2-D myself although the trouser size has been gradually increasing these last few years and it’s not because my legs are getting longer.
(with my luck it’s be caused by corrupt preferences, again)
(or more likely an uninitialized variable we haven’t tracked down yet)
Mick – you weren’t ignored. We said we couldn’t reproduce it. A few other people have reported this behavior – but it’s always difficult to tell whether they fully understand "max compatibility" or not and if they’re seeing expected or unexpected behavior.
(Yes, I have been a little crabby — we seem to have come down with an infection of trolls here in the forums)
I’ve just reset to Never and restarted PS. It reverts back immediately to the behaviour I first described. Adjustment layer doubles the file size.
No worries Chris. There is a lot of mindless ranting and it is difficult to determine if somebody is really seeing a problem with the program as against all of the other things it could be. Best of luck with the trolls.
(Yes, I have been a little crabby — we seem to have come down with an infection of trolls here in the forums)
This is code for : "I apologize for being and AH, but some folk bring the worst/best out in me." 😉
Ian (looking for the hidden exit)
PS: Scott – stop laughing!
Good news perhaps? I just reset my prefs and the behaviour has returned to normal. Changed Max Compatibility to Never straight away. No file swelling. I’ve not had to reset prefs for any reason until now. I’ll keep an eye on it and see if it changes.
Mick,
I think that’s what Chris was saying.
Probably right Ian. It was a bit cryptic for me. At least resetting the prefs is a quick fix if it holds.
Dosen’t work. It’s reverted already.
Chris, just update your troll virus defs, it’ll be fine.
Chris–
cleaning out the basement and found a whole lot of junk from the 70’s including several vintage Troll dolls…should I send them and include pins for voodoo practice?
Ed… Ed… you still there? you started this and just went away? You know, I discovered something annoying about PSCS too. I was using my pirated copy to try to scan currency for my counterfeiting business, and PSCS wouldn’t open the file for me!!! (Just kidding folks) Seriously, I’ve been using CS since it came out, and haven’t had any problems. Perhaps it’s a Windows compatibility issue. My only gripe is that when you spend more money to get the whole suite, they don’t send you the manuals… that’s an extra $60.00 😛 Some people (me) read those!!! Oh well, I’m writing my own. Yes, another PhotoShop book. I’ll keep you posted 🙂
Those manuals are provided in PDF format on the CDs.
Bob
Try reading that in bed… without a lap top 🙂
Ever thot of printing them out and sticking them in a binder?
Mick, does it revert during a run, or only after you’ve restarted Photoshop? You’ve at least given us enough clues to start looking, but that one last piece of info will help narrow it down for sure (or generate more questions :-).
-Scott
Scott
I think it reverted after I quit and restarted but I’m not sure. I’ll run a few tests now and report back.
Ok that was quick. I reset the prefs (just moved old prefs out of folder and PS created new prefs). Quit and started PS after changing to Never and putting scratch on other drive without opening any files.
Open new flat file, added levels adjustment layer and saved. Behaviour normal (677 to 726 kb). Closed file. Opened second flat file, added adjustment layer, saved and file size doubled to 1341. So it happens while PS is running.
good job mick! <golf clap>
CS is still not the buggiest version ever.
So I take it that the recommendation here is to set max compat. to ask instead of never?
for now, christine, yup. it seems so.
The fix for me is to simply save over the file – save as and then overwrite the existing file. Once I do this, the file goes back down to normal size. After doing this adding new adjustment layers does not swell the file again. I think this is better than setting to Ask and unticking the box every time.
good job mick! <golf clap>
Seconded.
Whenever something like this happens, you go through a brief period where you think that others may think you’re nuts. It’s always gratifying to know that you aren’t (at least not by this determinant).
Thanks Tony and Dave. I knew that what I was seeing was not correct behaviour but the fact that nobody else seemed to be seeing it makes one a bit lonely. You don’t know how good it felt when Ian said he was seeing it too.
You guys are breaking my heart! I havn’t been on forums for a couple of years. Had a bit of a break and took up more study. Decided to upgrade to CS as I can now get academic software. Thought I’d check it out with you lot first. You’re scaring me off. I’m currently on PS 5.5 and Illustrator 9. Thought I’d try Indesign (I used to work in Quark but can’t afford it myself). Am I making the right move?????
Can’t say about the rest of the CS suite but I love PSCS. I’ve had no problems at all with it apart from the minor bug I reported which caused this thread to extend. The original poster of this thread was talking rubbish. You will probably need 1Gb of RAM to run PSCS comfortably.
You’re scaring me off.
I’ve also had no problems with cs. You have to remember at a forum like this, most people come here BECAUSE they have problems, not to say how good the SW’s running. You’re viewing a very skewed slice of the installed base.
Agreed. Since I first used v. 1.01 It might be the XP/CS combo. In any case, everyone I know has had some issues with CS! Wow.
I have xp pro and cs and no problems. p4 2.8c hyprethreaded, 1gig pc3200 400mhz ddr ram, intel d865perl (800mhz fsb) mobo, seagate barracuda serial ata primary hd + 2 pc133 ide drives. ati all in wonder 9700 pro primary vid and nvida no name card(secondary).
Lyn – it’s extremely stable and highly functional so far working at the multi-layer A4/A3 document level (with 100 history states set, no scratch disc and only 512MB RAM!) And I thought my system was state of the art, LOL. Quick, next to no processing delays, excellent resizing.
I kinda miss my Paint Shop Pro 8 crashing. Not one crash with PSCS. At academic prices you’re crazy not to get the suite. Spend an extra $50 and get the new printed suite manual.
Adam.
Lyn,
Am I making the right move?????<<
Without doubt – and you will ADORE ID after QXP!
Without doubt – and you will ADORE ID after QXP!
Or after just about any other page layout app.
Bob
Well I don’t agree it is the ‘buggiest’ ever it does have its problems. I have just spent 3 days on the phone (at my expense from the east coast…) trying to get some support for the problem with my newly installed CS, bought by the way with ( quite a bit of…) my hard earned money. With no help from Adobe I tracked the problem to the ‘Windows XP theme’ file. If my desktop is using that theme, i. e. the blue sky and green grass the CS WILL NOT launch past the splash screen. I have to go to the ‘Windows Classic theme’ in order to launch CS. Not the end of the world but a lost week of work and phone bills… 🙁
"…I have just spent 3 days on the phone (at my expense from the east coast…)…"
This starts me wondering how feasible it might be for companies to implement tech support over audio chat via AIM or iChat as a way of unburdening folks from long-distance telephone charges. Companies most surely have broadband connections, and so many individuals do as well, so the infrastructure is becoming widespread enough for it to be practical. I use iChat with my brother several states away, latency is zero for full-duplex and the sound quality and S/N ratio is way better than the telephone.
It sure would be a nice gesture toward customers, and I can’t imagine it’d be too difficult to build upon the present software in order to put users into a queue for the next available TechnicalChatRepresentative the same way we get put in a queue when we telephone.
During a TechChat session users would also be able to send current screenshots if necessary, providing their TechChatRep another tool to help diagnose a problem.
Just some random brainstorming on a boring Friday night…
Thinks this is bullshit.. U are using a crack, i had the same problem when i was testing it,( as a uregged version) and i used a crack to get the 2 weeks notice away, after that i got alot of problems with the keyboard. and with some mmx core files and a "something50 file" twice.
U need to buy this shit to complain about it .. stupid.
Try the full version Adibe studio CS, where the keyboard shortcuts work,. and belive me, when i say it. I have tested it on many types of keyboeards, and i know it works.
But i still think Adobe could do a better job on the windows version of CS. it is very buggy. And u crewed up the filebrowser, i hate it now, but loveed it on the 7 version.
/*Just a piece of my mine. Thrown at ya!
I’m surprised your shortcuts work, as your keyboard appears to be malfunctioning.
Just some random brainstorming on a boring Friday night…
Phosphor,
Iomega once had something like that. It was a live chat support desk. Not audio, but keyboard based.
The employee "Pawn" tried to help me unsuccessfully, and after a while it appeared to be a machine! I was online for half an hour chatting with a robot!
I revealed this by asking for the name of a random rockband. The answer was not "the Who" or "Yes", but "is there anything else I can do for you?"
Rob K…
I was at a friend’s house just a couple weeks ago and he was getting some sort of Java application live tech support via text. There are lots of companies that do this, I suppose.
VOIP over would be better.
the only time i needed MS tech support (to close an msn account) i used an online live text chat system they had set up at their site. very nice.
U need to buy this <inapproriate language deleted by forum host>.. to complain about it ..
yup. have a nice day.
