The future of PSP

[hartpaul]

I use PSP X2 for most of my photo work because of the speed of application and because the Enter key applies a Levels adjustment, whereas in the later versions the default Enter = Apply fails even though the OK button is highlighted .
I also like the Save button to use the Save As compression which it does in X2. Each session my first Save is a Save As where I check the compression is correct and then could use the Save button thereafter. Except that I use the X to close and then Enter to accept the default Save. Much faster.
Corel experimented with the Save button in X8 to save people from accidentally saving at the default 20 compression (whereas they could have made the default say 4 or 5) and in my opinion made a bad mistake
which was corrected to a certain extent in X9.
I use X4 - X7 for text work as I dislike the text box.

So for me I don't really need to update to any of the later versions past X4 but do so as if friends eventually get PSP they will get the latest version and I need to have that latest version to be able to help them with any problems. If Corel were to fix a lot of those niggling problems I have mentioned then a future version would be an all in one version that I would then be able to use instead of two version used now and I could drop X2.

I rarely use vector work as much as other people apparently do. If I was specialising in vector work then I would get a specialist program for that rather than hoping that PSP would be come a specialist vector , panorama , Raw Converter etc program.

.

[rondo]

64 bit versions of PSP perform much better. I upgraded to X6 just for the 64 bit program, and have stayed with that as it does what I need.

[JoeB]

64 bit versions of PSP perform much better. I upgraded to X6 just for the 64 bit program, and have stayed with that as it does what I need.

They may work faster, but if you regularly use various very useful plugins that haven't been - and some that likely never will be - updated from 32bit to 64 bit then it pays to have both versions installed. After all, you purchase one and you get both the 32bit and 64bit versions.

[Grazie]

If Carlsberg made arrogance...

And again, if I can be of assistance to COREL, I'm here to test.

[Rick_R]

When I say "low-end" product, I'm talking about a combination of:

1. Selling price within their product line. PSP is by far Corel's lowest-price graphics software. Corel's professional software sells for 8-10 times the price of what PSP often can be bought for (if you get the previous PSP version, not the current one.)
2. Capabilities of the product. No one would regularly use PSP mainly for serious from-scratch drawing or painting, rather than getting Corel's specialized--and higher-priced--products aimed at the prosumer market.
3. Capabilities of other companies' products in the same price range, e.g., Photoshop Elements. PE is similarly priced and has similar functionality. PE too is aimed at the hobbyist market, where people don't want to spend $500+ for a single piece of software.
4. Capabilities compared to other companies' high-end products such as Photoshop.

Corel bought the PSP product "ready to go" from JASC because it had nothing to compete with PE, PhotoStudio from Arcsoft, or any of the other photo-editing software in the $60-100 range at that time.

Another thing about "low end" is it is extremely price-sensitive. There are loads of people who wouldn't give a second thought to paying $49.99 for a program but "no way in hell" would they pay $64.99 regardless of how much better the product is. The same reasoning wouldn't apply to a $25 price difference on a $500 program.