I have never seen the need for a programme with more features than Photoimpact, so I have never felt the urget to fork out the sort of money that Adobe wants to charge.
But a lot of people seem to have Photoshop (how they got it is not clear!) and discussion on image processing related forums often revolves around the use of Photoshop. For that reason alone I am tempted to move but at the same time I don't want to waste money. I think that if it is just a case of a photoshop-herd thing then I will not change. But if there are real advantages to Photoshop, that I may make use of in the future, then I might consider it.
What are the comparative advantages of Photoshop and Photoimpact?
By the way, the Forum rules say
The poll -- which is really meant to be fun only -- asks if other members would purchase Photoshop *for the features* (not because it is a "standard"). The second response option is for those that believe that the advantages are minimal, and not worth the money.16. You may dicuss anything under the General Discussions as long as it is related to Video, Imaging, and DVD whether non-Ulead products are involved or not. This forums will also be monitored.
From reading the forums I come up with
1) I hear that photoshop does "layers" as opposed to "objects." I guess that layers can contain several objects. This sounds like it could be useful. Sometimes I have wanted to change more than one object.