Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/03/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Unfortunately, most upgrades usually have more bloat. And again, don't forget the fiasco of Apple's Final Cut X - that drove boatloads of their customers to other software. And lets not talk about Leopard handling of Epson printing. I don't use a Mac, so I don't know if they fixed it in Snow Leopard or Lion. And don't even mention Lion. And don't, just don't, mention Vista. Boy, was that a great success. Not all latest are greatest. It's not about saving money, it's about making sure the things you expect to work, still work. On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > Personally when Adobe or Microsoft or anybody who makes software I use > every > day upgrades it I upgrade it. It would not occur to me in a million years > not to. I don't need a reason to upgrade I need a reason not to. > In Mac Apple system 9 there was a thing called extension conflicts and > there > were other conflicts. But that was many many years ago. > A company like Adobe does not sit on their hands they are working every day > to improve their software. And with computer system upgrades I want my > computer system and the software its working with to both get along > ideally. > And they all should get along with any scanner software. > Its never a thing like "is upgrading worth it?" > What cleaver new feather have they added to make me shell out the bucks one > more time? They don't need anything flashy. Just tighter written code would > be nice. I'm sure they do that too. > > -- > Mark R. > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/winterdays/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>