<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.11" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Photoshop CS2 Details Leaked; Creative Suite 2 To Announce Monday</title>
	<link>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2005/photoshop-cs2-details-leaked-creative-suite-2-to-announce-monday/</link>
	<description>The Authority for News &#038; Opinion on the War of the Desktop Publishing Giants QuarkXPress and Adobe InDesign</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 17:28:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.11</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Pariah S. Burke</title>
		<link>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2005/photoshop-cs2-details-leaked-creative-suite-2-to-announce-monday/#comment-350</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:07:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2005/photoshop-cs2-details-leaked-creative-suite-2-to-announce-monday/#comment-350</guid>
					<description>AppleInsider saw this post wherein I call them on their false claim to exclusivity, and they've tried to cover it up.

When I wrote the above story--and for at least an hour thereafter--the AppleInsider story stated:

"&lt;strong&gt;According to documents obtained exclusively by AppleInsider&lt;/strong&gt;, Adobe Photoshop CS2 will begin shipping in May..."

They have since awkwardly edited it to read:

"&lt;strong&gt;According to documents&lt;/strong&gt;, Adobe Photoshop CS2 will begin shipping in May..."

Instead of owning up to their mistake like responsible journalists or citizen journalists, they decided to pull a fast one and try to cover it up. I wish I had PDFed the original page like I did the post-edit. Interestingly they also refused to activate my membership, which makes me unable to post a reply to their story.&lt;!-- strikes =  --&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AppleInsider saw this post wherein I call them on their false claim to exclusivity, and they&#8217;ve tried to cover it up.</p>
<p>When I wrote the above story&#8212;and for at least an hour thereafter&#8212;the AppleInsider story stated:</p>
<p>&#8220;<strong>According to documents obtained exclusively by AppleInsider</strong>, Adobe Photoshop CS2 will begin shipping in May&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>They have since awkwardly edited it to read:</p>
<p>&#8220;<strong>According to documents</strong>, Adobe Photoshop CS2 will begin shipping in May&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>Instead of owning up to their mistake like responsible journalists or citizen journalists, they decided to pull a fast one and try to cover it up. I wish I had PDFed the original page like I did the post-edit. Interestingly they also refused to activate my membership, which makes me unable to post a reply to their story.<!-- strikes =  -->
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
