This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Paint Shop Pro support > May 2006 > Is PSP 3.11 worth its price?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Is PSP 3.11 worth its price?
|
|
|
| "Fred" <testing@testing1212mouse.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:4oO0g.660$_s5.591@trnddc04...
[snip]
> Since I have been posting here the last few days, I am reading about lots
> of
> bugs and annoying problems with the later PSP versions. Never had any
> problems at all with 3.11.
[snip]
Just dowmloaded PSP3.11 from
http://www.cmis.brighton.ac.uk/rese...prty/psp311.htm
This is a shareware, has to be purchased after 30 days. Would cost
USD 69. Is this worth, considering that PSP X is only USD 99?
Siggi
| |
|
|
"Siggi" <smusnmrNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e2q4sr$bfj5$1@zam602.zam.kfa-juelich.de...
> "Fred" <testing@testing1212mouse.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:4oO0g.660$_s5.591@trnddc04...
> [snip]
> [snip]
>
> Just dowmloaded PSP3.11 from
> http://www.cmis.brighton.ac.uk/rese...prty/psp311.htm
>
> This is a shareware, has to be purchased after 30 days. Would cost
> USD 69. Is this worth, considering that PSP X is only USD 99?
>
> Siggi
>
Was! Its no longer available and has not been for a long time
If you can find a Genuine PSP 9 at a clearance price That Might be the best
Buy
| |
|
|
"Trev" <trevbowdenAT.dsl.pipex.COM> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:x46dnVyAj_bXAc3ZRVnyuA@pipex.net...
>
> "Siggi" <smusnmrNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
[snip]
> Was! Its no longer available and has not been for a long time
>
> If you can find a Genuine PSP 9 at a clearance price That Might be the
> best Buy
I own PSP 9! Just was curious because of Fred's "PSP 3.11 is all I need".
Just thought the long outdated PSP 3.11 would be freeware by now and
I could use it for the small tasks Fred favored it over PSP9. I agree that
PSP9 is kind of slow and tedious. Apart from that, I find it a wonderful
program.
Siggi
| |
| Dave Symes 2006-04-28, 7:09 pm |
| In article <e2tntg$bkpj$1@zam602.zam.kfa-juelich.de>,
Siggi <smusnmrNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Trev" <trevbowdenAT.dsl.pipex.COM> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:x46dnVyAj_bXAc3ZRVnyuA@pipex.net...
> [snip]
> I own PSP 9! Just was curious because of Fred's "PSP 3.11 is all I
> need". Just thought the long outdated PSP 3.11 would be freeware by now
> and I could use it for the small tasks Fred favored it over PSP9. I
> agree that PSP9 is kind of slow and tedious. Apart from that, I find it
> a wonderful program.
> Siggi
On balance, if I was looking for a faster and a bit less featured version
of PSP I'd go for version 7.04
TBH 3.11 is so very old, I'm not sure it would be worth installing it.
That said, of course each to their own...
Though I have version X installed, my personal preferred version is 9.01
mostly because I can't stand the apalling new (Deleted expletive) Browser.
Dave S
AKA Grumpy Dave for very good reasons.
--
| |
| gregfarr 2006-04-28, 7:09 pm |
| On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 20:46:05 +0200, "Siggi" <smusnmrNOSPAM@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>"Trev" <trevbowdenAT.dsl.pipex.COM> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>news:x46dnVyAj_bXAc3ZRVnyuA@pipex.net...
>[snip]
>I own PSP 9! Just was curious because of Fred's "PSP 3.11 is all I need".
>Just thought the long outdated PSP 3.11 would be freeware by now and
>I could use it for the small tasks Fred favored it over PSP9. I agree that
>PSP9 is kind of slow and tedious. Apart from that, I find it a wonderful
>program.
>
>Siggi
>
If you need something small, fast, compact, that still has some great
abilities, get 7.04, as it loads in a second, and does a lot, should
be on ebay for a buck eighty nine.
Greg
http://gregsplace.50megs.com
http://www.picturetrail.com/fugitive1
| |
|
| Siggi wrote:
> "Trev" <trevbowdenAT.dsl.pipex.COM> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:x46dnVyAj_bXAc3ZRVnyuA@pipex.net...
>
>
> [snip]
>
>
> I own PSP 9! Just was curious because of Fred's "PSP 3.11 is all I need".
> Just thought the long outdated PSP 3.11 would be freeware by now and
> I could use it for the small tasks Fred favored it over PSP9. I agree that
> PSP9 is kind of slow and tedious.
Slow and tedious? Sounds like Jasc.
:-)
Uni
Apart from that, I find it a wonderful
> program.
>
> Siggi
>
>
| |
|
| gregfarr wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 20:46:05 +0200, "Siggi" <smusnmrNOSPAM@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> If you need something small, fast, compact
Sounds like a personal problem.
:-)
Uni
, that still has some great
> abilities, get 7.04, as it loads in a second, and does a lot, should
> be on ebay for a buck eighty nine.
>
> Greg
> http://gregsplace.50megs.com
> http://www.picturetrail.com/fugitive1
| |
| gregfarr 2006-04-29, 6:57 pm |
| On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 20:21:27 +0100, Dave Symes <dfs@ukgateway.net>
wrote:
>In article <e2tntg$bkpj$1@zam602.zam.kfa-juelich.de>,
> Siggi <smusnmrNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>On balance, if I was looking for a faster and a bit less featured version
>of PSP I'd go for version 7.04
>
>TBH 3.11 is so very old, I'm not sure it would be worth installing it.
>That said, of course each to their own...
>Though I have version X installed, my personal preferred version is 9.01
>mostly because I can't stand the apalling new (Deleted expletive) Browser.
>
>Dave S
>AKA Grumpy Dave for very good reasons.
Now, what did those egg heads do to the wonderful psp browser, the one
that beats all other outfits, and has been around for so long, I
forget what vs, you mean they had the temerity to mess with that one?
Greg
http://gregsplace.50megs.com
http://www.picturetrail.com/fugitive1
| |
| Dave Symes 2006-04-29, 6:57 pm |
| In article <prk652h5mfe20med4tc353oblbv60irg96@4ax.com>,
gregfarr <gregfarr@comcast.net> wrote:
> Now, what did those egg heads do to the wonderful psp browser, the one
> that beats all other outfits, and has been around for so long, I
> forget what vs, you mean they had the temerity to mess with that one?
> Greg
Greg,
Not quite sure I understand what you are asking, but the browser in
version 8 and version 9 did the business for me.
The abortion, is the browser in version X which is not a browser but a
PITA.
GD
--
| |
|
| gregfarr <gregfarr@comcast.net> wrote in
news:prk652h5mfe20med4tc353oblbv60irg96@4ax.com:
[snipped]
installing it.[color=darkred]
version is[color=darkred]
expletive)[color=darkred]
>
>
> Now, what did those egg heads do to the wonderful psp browser,
the one
> that beats all other outfits, and has been around for so long,
I
> forget what vs, you mean they had the temerity to mess with
that one?
>
> Greg
The browser in v.X is not a regular window but a palette. The
biggest gripe about that is that when you click a thumbnail and
open the image, it goes behind the palette so you can't see it.
You can, however, make the palette roll up just like the other
palettes to get it out of the way.
Regards,
JoeB
| |
| Dave Symes 2006-04-29, 6:57 pm |
| In article <Xns97B462DE726BFJoeB@24.70.95.211>,
JoeB <myemail@yahoo.com> wrote:
[Snippy]
Dave wrote:
[color=darkred]
> The browser in v.X is not a regular window but a palette. The
> biggest gripe about that is that when you click a thumbnail and
> open the image, it goes behind the palette so you can't see it.
> You can, however, make the palette roll up just like the other
> palettes to get it out of the way.
> Regards,
> JoeB
Sorry Joe, as I've been with the X version almost from its first release,
I've been in the loop with regard to Xs failings, so I'm well aware of
what can be done with the browser palette.
My suggestion for things to do with the new excrement browser is to find
the person who's responsible, and shove it up where my above noted epithet
comes from.
As I don't *ever* have any rollups active (and I haven't smoked for at
least 30+ years) I don't intent to start now... Besides all that popin up
and vanishing is an annoying distraction.
I want the original 8/9 style browser reinstated, they can make it an
option so those who want the idiot palette browser can have it, and those
of use who want what we want can have our browser back.
I hate the action, the concept of the palette browser with so much depth,
that it makes me depressed just thinking about it, let alone mentioning it
in a posting.
I'm not against change and development, by why oh why does one of the
clauses in Sods Law say, that when the effers change something it's for
the worse, not better.
And people wonder why I'm so grumpy,
GROK!
A very, very, Grumpy Dave
PS: I watched the third episode of the new Dr Who season tonight and
really enjoyed it, but after writing about that damn browser, I'm down and
depressed.
GD
--
| |
| gregfarr 2006-05-01, 11:37 pm |
| On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 14:36:50 +0100, Dave Symes <dfs@ukgateway.net>
wrote:
>In article <prk652h5mfe20med4tc353oblbv60irg96@4ax.com>,
> gregfarr <gregfarr@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>Greg,
>Not quite sure I understand what you are asking, but the browser in
>version 8 and version 9 did the business for me.
>The abortion, is the browser in version X which is not a browser but a
>PITA.
>
>GD
Well, then, that's the one, I'd like to know about, cause they had
good ones for many yrs, so what did they do to it?
Greg
http://gregsplace.50megs.com
http://www.picturetrail.com/fugitive1
| |
| gregfarr 2006-05-01, 11:37 pm |
| On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 22:10:45 +0100, Dave Symes <dfs@ukgateway.net>
wrote:
>In article <Xns97B462DE726BFJoeB@24.70.95.211>,
> JoeB <myemail@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>[Snippy]
>Dave wrote:
>
>
>
>
>Sorry Joe, as I've been with the X version almost from its first release,
>I've been in the loop with regard to Xs failings, so I'm well aware of
>what can be done with the browser palette.
>
>My suggestion for things to do with the new excrement browser is to find
>the person who's responsible, and shove it up where my above noted epithet
>comes from.
>
>As I don't *ever* have any rollups active (and I haven't smoked for at
>least 30+ years) I don't intent to start now... Besides all that popin up
>and vanishing is an annoying distraction.
>
>I want the original 8/9 style browser reinstated, they can make it an
>option so those who want the idiot palette browser can have it, and those
>of use who want what we want can have our browser back.
>
>I hate the action, the concept of the palette browser with so much depth,
>that it makes me depressed just thinking about it, let alone mentioning it
>in a posting.
>
>I'm not against change and development, by why oh why does one of the
>clauses in Sods Law say, that when the effers change something it's for
>the worse, not better.
>
>And people wonder why I'm so grumpy,
>GROK!
>
>A very, very, Grumpy Dave
>
>PS: I watched the third episode of the new Dr Who season tonight and
>really enjoyed it, but after writing about that damn browser, I'm down and
>depressed.
>
>GD
Then you should watch something good, like House. I've tried the Dr,
and 24, and the Shield, and they have a dab of phonyness, that's just
too much to take. Some, like Bones, cross over too, as far as the real
world, but do it in a funny way, that's not irritating. As far as psp
goes, I ve got 7, 8, and 9, and run 8 every day for it's utility, and
manageable size, 9 is about 20 meg more for Ram, which puts it at 90,
and that makes it the highest I've ever run, until Twisted Brush came
along.
Greg
http://gregsplace.50megs.com
http://www.picturetrail.com/fugitive1
| |
| redthewitch75 2006-05-13, 10:56 pm |
| Well, I am new here, as well as to PSP X. But, I don't have any complaints
yet about X. I have been using the various versions of PSP throughout the
years, most recently PSP 9, and the only thing I am having a problem with is
getting my open image to tab when I open a new or other image. So anyway, I
am wondering why I am not noticing what the deal is with the browser/palette
thing?
Thanks,
red
"gregfarr" <gregfarr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:bocd52duabqadd6u5a5v428hqibgm4qjv4@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 22:10:45 +0100, Dave Symes <dfs@ukgateway.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Then you should watch something good, like House. I've tried the Dr,
> and 24, and the Shield, and they have a dab of phonyness, that's just
> too much to take. Some, like Bones, cross over too, as far as the real
> world, but do it in a funny way, that's not irritating. As far as psp
> goes, I ve got 7, 8, and 9, and run 8 every day for it's utility, and
> manageable size, 9 is about 20 meg more for Ram, which puts it at 90,
> and that makes it the highest I've ever run, until Twisted Brush came
> along.
>
> Greg
> http://gregsplace.50megs.com
> http://www.picturetrail.com/fugitive1
| |
|
| "redthewitch75" <redthewitch75@woh.rr.com> wrote in
news:IPt9g.32143$mh.642@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:
> Well, I am new here, as well as to PSP X. But, I don't have any
> complaints yet about X. I have been using the various versions of PSP
> throughout the years, most recently PSP 9, and the only thing I am
> having a problem with is getting my open image to tab when I open a
> new or other image. So anyway, I am wondering why I am not noticing
> what the deal is with the browser/palette thing?
IMHO - mainly a matter of preferences. People got used to having the
browser act as an MDI child window within the editing window. When it got
changed to an independent palette in version 10 instead (which some people
have been wanting for years), some of it's properties changed and it no
longer behaves quite like the browser in versions 4-9.
It's pretty much the reverse of the complaints that were heard when the
browser in version 3 was changed from an independent executable (it acted
much like the current browser palette setup) to an MDI child window setup
in version 4. The only difference back then was that the complaints were
about having the browser forced into the editing window where it took up
precious screen real estate. Now that it's finally been moved back out of
there, the complaints are about wanting to put it back in again. <<shrug>>
--
Rick Simon rsimon@cris.com
Include "spam(trap)key" somewhere in the
body of any email to avoid spam filters.
| |
|
| Rick <rsimon@cris.com> wrote in
news:Xns97C2D1D3CC1FErlsomewhere@69.28.186.121:
> "redthewitch75" <redthewitch75@woh.rr.com> wrote in
> news:IPt9g.32143$mh.642@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:
>
any[color=darkred]
of PSP[color=darkred]
I am[color=darkred]
open a[color=darkred]
noticing[color=darkred]
>
>
> IMHO - mainly a matter of preferences. People got used to
having the
> browser act as an MDI child window within the editing window.
When it
> got changed to an independent palette in version 10 instead
(which
> some people have been wanting for years), some of it's
properties
> changed and it no longer behaves quite like the browser in
versions
> 4-9.
>
> It's pretty much the reverse of the complaints that were heard
when
> the
> browser in version 3 was changed from an independent executable
(it
> acted much like the current browser palette setup) to an MDI
child
> window setup in version 4. The only difference back then was
that the
> complaints were about having the browser forced into the
editing
> window where it took up precious screen real estate. Now that
it's
> finally been moved back out of there, the complaints are about
wanting
> to put it back in again. <<shrug>>
>
>
While I agree it's a matter of preference, I disagree about the
complaints. People would be happy to have the preference to move
the browser from the workspace. What they don't like now is the
fact that the browser remains on top of an openend image unless
it is set to automatically close or rollup on opening an image.
But that seems minor now compared to major problems with the
original release of v.X and its browser.
Prior to the 10.02 patch the browser didn't support drag and drop
within it or within the browser folders. Then prior to the 10.03
patch there were issues with the program not loading plugins if
the browser had been open when they last exited PSPX. My reading
of the groups is that, since 10.03, complaints about the browser
are few.
Regards,
JoeB
| |
|
| JoeB <myemail@yahoo.com> wrote in news:Xns97C381AA6CD0EJoeB@24.70.95.211:
>
> While I agree it's a matter of preference, I disagree about the
> complaints. People would be happy to have the preference to move
> the browser from the workspace. What they don't like now is the
> fact that the browser remains on top of an openend image unless
> it is set to automatically close or rollup on opening an image.
Or one uses the Browser button on a toolbar as a one click "toggle" to
make it come and go as desired. Or one simply presses CTRL+B to make it
come and go as desired. Any of those options will resolve the issue with a
relative minimum of effort. The fact that the browser now opens on top of
any open images and does not automatically hide is a relatively minor
complaint. IMHO - it falls into the category of the "it doesn't work the
way it used to" type complaints that pop up with every new version.
> But that seems minor now compared to major problems with the
> original release of v.X and its browser.
>
> Prior to the 10.02 patch the browser didn't support drag and drop
> within it or within the browser folders. Then prior to the 10.03
> patch there were issues with the program not loading plugins if
> the browser had been open when they last exited PSPX. My reading
> of the groups is that, since 10.03, complaints about the browser
> are few.
I was assuming the OP was referring to recent complaints about the
browser. Since 10.03 was released what? 3 months ago? and 10.02 was
released over 5 months ago, I wasn't thinking about those versions. Not
that the original version of the browser bothered me that much to begin
with. Since I don't use the browser as a file manager and don't use much in
the way of plugins, I was never overly bothered by those particular
problems. I'll readily agree that they did need to be fixed though, since
there are a lot of users for whom those were real problems.
--
Rick Simon rsimon@cris.com
Include "spam(trap)key" somewhere in the
body of any email to avoid spam filters.
| |
|
| Rick <rsimon@cris.com> wrote in
news:Xns97C3ADE4734DErlsomewhere@69.28.186.121:
> JoeB <myemail@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:Xns97C381AA6CD0EJoeB@24.70.95.211:
the[color=darkred]
move[color=darkred]
the[color=darkred]
unless[color=darkred]
image.[color=darkred]
>
>The fact that the browser now opens
> on top of any open images and does not automatically hide is a
> relatively minor complaint. IMHO
It seems to me that I said that already, as seen in my quote
below:
[color=darkred]
drop[color=darkred]
10.03[color=darkred]
if[color=darkred]
reading[color=darkred]
browser[color=darkred]
>
>
> I was assuming the OP was referring to recent complaints about
the
> browser.
Ahhh, and that might be where we differed. I didn't make that
assumption. Not knowing what posts or complaints the OP (Red)
had become aware of, or even even if he had upgraded his download
with the patches, I figured I'd give the present views based on
most posts I've seen, as well as an overview of the problems from
the original program through the corrections with the different
patches.
Just a different approach to the question, I guess.
Regards,
JoeB
> Since 10.03 was released what? 3 months ago? and 10.02 was
> released over 5 months ago, I wasn't thinking about those
versions.
> Not that the original version of the browser bothered me that
much to
> begin with. Since I don't use the browser as a file manager and
don't
> use much in the way of plugins, I was never overly bothered by
those
> particular problems. I'll readily agree that they did need to
be fixed
> though, since there are a lot of users for whom those were real
> problems.
>
>
| |
|
| JoeB wrote:
> Rick <rsimon@cris.com> wrote in
> news:Xns97C2D1D3CC1FErlsomewhere@69.28.186.121:
>
>
> While I agree it's a matter of preference, I disagree about the
> complaints. People would be happy to have the preference to move
> the browser from the workspace. What they don't like now is the
> fact that the browser remains on top of an openend image unless
> it is set to automatically close or rollup on opening an image.
> But that seems minor now compared to major problems with the
> original release of v.X and its browser.
>
> Prior to the 10.02 patch the browser didn't support drag and drop
> within it or within the browser folders. Then prior to the 10.03
> patch there were issues with the program not loading plugins if
> the browser had been open when they last exited PSPX. My reading
> of the groups is that, since 10.03, complaints about the browser
> are few.
>
> Regards,
>
> JoeB
You can set it to automatically close but not to automatically roll up.
--
Tim
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|