# Leopard breaks Photoshop 7



## csonni (Feb 8, 2001)

Haven't been able to start up Photoshop 7 since installing Leopard. I can't remember what came up, but as far as I can tell, PS 7 is not compatible. Anyone else have the same experience?


----------



## RicktheChemist (Jul 18, 2001)

.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Confirmed and I doubt Adobe will fix it.


----------



## absolutetotalgeek (Sep 18, 2005)

Ya, Adobe doesn't want to hear about PS7. I can confirm that from helping a friend..:lmao:


----------



## RicktheChemist (Jul 18, 2001)

.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

We're lucky most of CS3 works with Leopard, how would we expect Photoshop from 3 versions ago to work? Here it is from the horses mouth:

"While older Adobe applications may install and run on Mac OS X Leopard, they were designed, tested, and released to the public several years before this new operating system became available," Adobe wrote in its FAQ. "You may, therefore, experience a variety of installation, stability, and reliability issues for which there is no resolution."

MacNN | Adobe outlines Leopard compatibility

SOL


----------



## RicktheChemist (Jul 18, 2001)

.


----------



## csonni (Feb 8, 2001)

I may end up going with Elements since I never did use PS to its fullest potential.


----------



## RicktheChemist (Jul 18, 2001)

.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

RicktheChemist said:


> And the fact that Office 2004 works seamlessly in Leopard?


PS7 was released in 2002, the fact that most macs from then aren't compatible with Leopard should give you a hint that software from that time period may not. As well, Office 2004 is still the most recent release for mac, of course they are going to support it. It might be different story had Office 2008 was out.



RicktheChemist said:


> I think that Adobe could make it work but chooses to not do so to sell their new and improved version.


Sure they could, but that doesn't make them money.

Plus adobe is notorious for not supporting old software, they think that releasing a new version of the software should be good enough to fix the previous versions quarks. Sh!t I can't even print collated from Indesign CS3 yet, I'll probably have to wait until CS4 for a fix.:lmao:


----------



## Atroz (Aug 7, 2005)

It appears that most of Adobe's stuff will not work unless it is very new. 

http://www.adobe.com/support/products/pdfs/leopardsupport.pdf


This includes the current edition of Elements and even CS2. 

I've given both a "load" test and they both seem to load. Didn't do any work in either.


----------



## csonni (Feb 8, 2001)

I'm keeping Tiger on one partition just to run PS7. Waiting for Elements 6 (or 5?). Don't see nay need to fork out too much to upgrade to CS3 when CS4 may be around the corner. I hate this keeping up with versions.


----------



## Snookaroo (Dec 12, 2007)

*Cs2*



Atroz said:


> This includes the current edition of Elements and even CS2.


has anyone else tried CS2 and Leopard? i've seen conflicting reports. i haven't gone to Leopard, but if i do i would want to have CS2 working.... i don't plan on upgrading to CS3 anytime soon. this could make a difference on the decision to upgrade to Leopard.


----------



## Gerbill (Jul 1, 2003)

Snookaroo said:


> has anyone else tried CS2 and Leopard? i've seen conflicting reports. i haven't gone to Leopard, but if i do i would want to have CS2 working.... i don't plan on upgrading to CS3 anytime soon. this could make a difference on the decision to upgrade to Leopard.


FYI, CS2 works OK in Leopard for me, at least so far. This includes not-very-intensive work with Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat Pro 7 and InDesign. At least I've had no crashes or refusals to load (knock on wood.)

I have a feeling that most of the problems between Leopard and major apps centres around WebKit changes - try avoiding anything to do with the Web, for example the Web Gallery feature in Photoshop.


----------



## Mr. Fartleberry (Dec 17, 2005)

*End of Line*

Yep, PS 7 is Kaput with Leopard. All of the comments are correct. Adobe care about PS7 as much as Apple care about a 4 year old laptop.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

Well, Photoshop 7 _is_ six years old (as of March, oddly enough.) Happy birthday!


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

csonni said:


> I'm keeping Tiger on one partition just to run PS7. Waiting for Elements 6 (or 5?). Don't see nay need to fork out too much to upgrade to CS3 when CS4 may be around the corner. I hate this keeping up with versions.


I can't believe you can say that with a straight face, when you just upgraded to Leopard!  I mean what do you think Leopard is. You upgrade your OS, you gotta expect a few other app upgrades.

Now I gotta check my Photoshop version.....


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

csonni said:


> I'm keeping Tiger on one partition just to run PS7. Waiting for Elements 6 (or 5?). Don't see nay need to fork out too much to upgrade to CS3 when CS4 may be around the corner. I hate this keeping up with versions.


Since the inital release of CS Adobe seems to release about every two years; since CS3 was released April 2007, we are probably looking at least a year until you see the "offical" new version (Yes, I know Stonehenge, had been leaked to peer-to-peer)...


----------



## jgerber (Apr 16, 2005)

> I mean what do you think Leopard is. You upgrade your OS, you gotta expect a few other app upgrades.


Hahaha... exactly!

Looks like PC's are in luck though, the CS3 still works on my XP system... but looks like if I got a Mac version, I'd have to upgrade my OS... since it's only 10.2.8, and from their site, looks like it requires Mac OS X v10.4.8-10.5 (Leopard)

I had CS2 standard... and upgraded to CS3 design premium, 'cause for the 600 dollar (give/take) upgrade, I was able to get Dreamweaver, Flash & Acrobat (all of which did not come with CS2 standard... and are themselves much much more than the upgrade cost alone). I just wish the package came with a stand-alone ftp prog. ;P

I'm hoping Adobe will fix any issues with their current release though for the current Mac OS.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

RicktheChemist said:


> And the fact that Office 2004 works seamlessly in Leopard? I think that Adobe could make it work but chooses to not do so to sell their new and improved version.


When Leopard was introduced, Office 2004 was the current shipping version - MS had to make it work. You don't see them going back to Office v.X and 2001 to fix it, do you?

I think I have to side with Adobe here. Photoshop 7 is quite old, how far back should a software developer go to update old software to work with a new OS, for free, no less. Their developers do not work for free. For that matter, why would you be so willing to fork money over to Apple for Tiger, Leopard, etc. but not to Adobe for a Photoshop upgrade? If you make a living using PhotoShop, then a few hundred dollars for an upgrade is nothing compared to the time and effort you will spend maintaining a separate Tiger partition just to run PhotoShop.


----------



## csonni (Feb 8, 2001)

I have since upgraded to CS3 and am perfectly happy.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

csonni said:


> I have since upgraded to CS3 and am perfectly happy.


I was going to say "Damn that was quick, within a day you upgraded." until I noticed the dates and that someone resurrected this thread. I REALLY got to watch those dates or we need a huge "THREAD RESURRECTED" sign. Some of us old people donn't have the best eyesight anymore!


----------



## johnb1 (Aug 6, 2006)

*rats*

sometimes, you have to bite the bullet, fork out the cash and upgrade. My mom has Finale 2004, perfectly okay. Quit working, found a patch to keep it going. Called Make Music, They told her to buy Finale 2008. she told 'em what to do with that idea

John B


----------



## Mr. Fartleberry (Dec 17, 2005)

Blame me for bringing this back to life, I had to do a search to figure out if it was just my box or everyone that was broken. 

I certainly admit that 7 is a computer dog's age due to the many updates both system wise and processor wise. And I've been to a few Adobe sessions downtown as well. But so far it is the only app that I have that doesn't work on Leopard and Adobe don't seem to want to talk about it. Coupled with the fact that it's likely the shortest lived and most expensive program you will ever own, well -   XX)

BTW Aperture 2.0.1 just quit on me during a simple folder rename and left me with 100 missing files from yesterday. Or should I say "not recognized". That was a few hours work lost. Doesn't exactly impart confidence in Apple's new wunderchild.


----------



## reh (Feb 19, 2008)

This just in: MacWrite doesn't work either!


----------



## jgerber (Apr 16, 2005)

Mr. Fartleberry said:


> Coupled with the fact that it's likely the shortest lived and most expensive program you will ever own, well -   XX.


Interesting that PS7 has a "shorter life" than PS 6.. 'cause PS 6 still works on other OS' (in fact on one system, we have both v6 AND cs3 installed). And is 650.00 really all that bad for software that is used by professionals? Maybe in due time, Apple will release a competing 'design software' package? (similar to the whole premiere/final cut thing?) It'd be interesting to see how the industry would go if that happened no?
(... or does apple already have such a program?)


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

This thread brings up an interesting question. How long should a company provide free updates? Remember, they have to pay their developers to fix these things. What's reasonable and what is not?

In my opinion, a version of a product should be fixed for free for the current operating system versions, and possibly the next within a reasonable amount of time (say six months to a year). So if version 2 comes out one month before Leopard, then version 1 should still be fixed for Leopard. But if version 2 comes out a year before Leopard, then it's not unreasonable to expect the customer to upgrade to version 2.


----------

