# Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software



## jhanken (May 6, 2013)

The Wall Street Journal is stating that Adobe is abandoning the packaged software model in favor of Creative Cloud, and plans no further release of Creative Suit after the current 6.0. I think this goes beyond just getting rid of the shrink wrap, the article says that subscription will be the only model. 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323826804578466830054806110.html?mod=djemTECH_h



> Shantanu Narayen, Adobe's chief executive, said creative professionals prefer features of the online service, he said, including the fact that it is constantly updated with new features. The company's subscription pricing also "scales the offering" from individual freelancers to the biggest enterprises.
> 
> "We wanted to align the company with the future of the creative process," Mr. Narayen said.



The article goes on to say the following:



> Adobe is offering existing Creative Suite customers discounts of about 40% on the first year of service. After that an annual contract costs $50 a month for individuals. Corporate subscriptions include cloud storage and administrative tools and cost $70 a month per user.



This seems like terrible news, I certainly don't need another cable bill just for my regular use of Lightroom and only occasional use of Photoshop. There is no mention of what Lightroom or Photoshop alone will cost, but I don't like the idea of subscription. Maybe competition in the workflow space will solve the problem.


----------



## jhanken (May 6, 2013)

Here is CNET's take on the matter:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57582735-92/adobe-kills-creative-suite-goes-subscription-only/


----------



## Brand B (May 6, 2013)

This will probably work fine for the professional market. But it will probably kill a lot of their amateur sales. People who buy creative suite, and then don't upgrade for 2, 3 or 4 years.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 6, 2013)

That sucks. I'm still using CS3... perhaps I should shell out for CS6 before they move to this subscription model.


----------



## jhanken (May 6, 2013)

Forgetting the cost for a moment, how would Lightroom service even work? Half the time I use it, I am on my laptop away from the grid. Are we going to have to load our photos upstream to the cloud in order to work on them? That doesn't seem practical to me when you are dealing with a couple hundred images in LR.


----------



## niteclicks (May 6, 2013)

Satellite is my only option and to expensive in my opinion. I do what I need at work as far as internet goes, so I'll stick with CS4.


----------



## wsheldon (May 6, 2013)

jhanken said:


> Forgetting the cost for a moment, how would Lightroom service even work? Half the time I use it, I am on my laptop away from the grid. Are we going to have to load our photos upstream to the cloud in order to work on them? That doesn't seem practical to me when you are dealing with a couple hundred images in LR.



I don't believe they're talking about cloud-based apps. I think you download and install normally, but activation and ongoing use requires an active subscription. So if you decide to stop paying, you can no longer open your files in the app. That's my big concern with this model. I also use a lot of site-licensed software at work and it can be a problem running such software when you're away from an Internet connection when the software decides to "phone home", depending on implementation. That could be an issue for people like you taking LR to remote locations on a laptop.

Lots of questions, though, particularly because they're planning to charge $10/mo for a single app and $50/mo for the full boat ($30/mo for the first year for upgraders). That's like buying a new copy of LR every 1-1.5 years, which I don't always do, and $360-600/yr is a LOT more than I pay now for all my Adobe software (PSE, Dreamweaver, etc).

Guess I'll be milking LR 4/PSE 10 for a long while, and hoping they still provide free Adobe Raw and/or DNG converters if I ever need a new camera.

Brave new world.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 6, 2013)

Its certainly good news for the competition. Adobe has always been out of touch with their pricing.


----------



## woollybear (May 6, 2013)

Software providers have been drooling over a subscription model for years. They have a semi- version of that now. If you read the EULA you will find you don't own most software you just plunked down $$'s on. 

I don't know sales numbers, I assume before they do something like this they analyze it with some care. That said, there was quite an outcry when they tried to change the upgrade path the last go round. They were going to offer upgrade pricing for current version users only, all other upgrades would be full price. Didn't follow it super closely but I don't believe that worked out too well for them. So maybe they don't care or don't know what will happen.

However, I find it hard to believe they won't lose massive numbers of customers. They will most definitely lose me.


----------



## unfocused (May 6, 2013)

Count me in among the unhappy customers. I think this is going to backfire on Adobe.

I consistently bought the upgrades (although I usually waited for their promotional deals). Once I'd bought into the system, it was affordable to upgrade. Frankly, I tended to overbuy (purchasing the entire Creative Suite when I seldom use anything but Photoshop, InDesign and Dreamweaver.)

Like some of the stories have said, I'll probably be one of those that subscribes for the first year at the promotional pricing, but once it goes to full price I'll take a very close look at renewal. I think Adobe may find that this plan actually results in less revenue.


----------



## Old Sarge (May 6, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> That sucks. I'm still using CS3... perhaps I should shell out for CS6 before they move to this subscription model.



I am among those people. I think I have CS4....yep, that is it...and might have upgraded next version. I was just testing LR in the beta version to see if I should move from DPP to it but I find PS Elements does a good job for me in cataloging and altering pictures so far. I also don't like subscription based software. Guess I am just too old for these new fangled notions......get off of my lawn you whipper-snappers.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 7, 2013)

The issue with subscription software is that Adobe holds your images ransom. Stop paying, and those 200,000 PSD files can't be edited, or all the edits in your lightroom catalog are locked up and held for ransom. Of course, you can hurry up and save them as jpegs, tiff, or dng.

I'm thinking Adobe hired that ex-ceo from Netflix


----------



## drjlo (May 7, 2013)

Jeez, time to sell off Adobe stock methinks.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2013)

LR 5 is in beta. Does this mean no release except by subscription? I've got CS6, and I'm quite happy with DxO and Aperture, but maybe it's worth buying LR while I can, just in case... ???


----------



## eml58 (May 7, 2013)

wsheldon said:


> jhanken said:
> 
> 
> > Forgetting the cost for a moment, how would Lightroom service even work? Half the time I use it, I am on my laptop away from the grid. Are we going to have to load our photos upstream to the cloud in order to work on them? That doesn't seem practical to me when you are dealing with a couple hundred images in LR.
> ...



This is correct, I currently use Adobe Cloud for current release of all Adobe products, you download & install what you need as you need it, the product is then on your Hard Drive just like the DVD you purchased, you again download any updates as part of the subscription model you paid for. Each year you pay the subscription.

It works & works well, I'm completely Happy, but there's a caveat, the current system of Adobe Cloud is designed for Companies that require the use of more than 1 Licensed user, it's not really designed for the individual user, hence the +USD$800 price Tag.

In Asia in particular the most cloned software is Adobe, you can buy a full copy of CS6 Suite of the side of the road in China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam etc, for $10 Bucks, so you can see why companies like Adobe are heading towards this Cloud Based Subscription Model, it's inevitable gentlemen, and Ladies.

I dont know for sure, but I would envisage Adobe creating a single user service of the Cloud at some point in the next 12 months, I would think prior to CS7, and I cant se the pricing not being more flexible for the single user, wouldn't make sense to try to charge a single user 800 bucks a year, as has been stated, Adobe will loose a huge amount of Business, and Adobe before all else, are about business & profits while providing a service.


----------



## Hill Benson (May 7, 2013)

I dread that this is the effect of Adobe having a monopoly in the market. I think you should be able to leap-frog releases if your willing to go without or simply don't need the latest version for a while. I believe there should be "online subscription" AND "bought off the shelf you own it for life" versions too. Adobe have targeted the people who don't upgrade at every single possible release. So disappointing that the bottom line is simple greed.


----------



## woollybear (May 7, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm thinking Adobe hired that ex-ceo from Netflix



More like JC Penney!


----------



## jcollett (May 7, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> LR 5 is in beta. Does this mean no release except by subscription? I've got CS6, and I'm quite happy with DxO and Aperture, but maybe it's worth buying LR while I can, just in case... ???



According to "The Queen" of Lightroom, it appears we are OK. Lightroom will exist in the cloud model but not exclusively.

http://www.lightroomqueen.com/2013/05/06/adobe-subscription-only-but-not-lightroom/


----------



## wickidwombat (May 7, 2013)

what a bunch of ***??!!! <insert any desired expletive

oh well looks like i wont be changing from CS6 in a hurry
I absolutely loathe subscription software

but what real alternatives are there? seriously when push comes to shove the competition
just are not as good as adobe  its pretty bad for to punish loyal customers like this
I hope it backfires and hurts them.


----------



## eml58 (May 7, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> what a bunch of ***??!!! <insert any desired expletive
> 
> oh well looks like i wont be changing from CS6 in a hurry
> I absolutely loathe subscription software
> ...



I have assumed with a name like "wicked wombat" you may be an Aussie, well, for the privilege of being in that far flung Country of Australia, you get to be charged 40% more than your American Cousins, Aussie current cost of CC is around $1200 bucks US equivalent. Adobe & Apple (among others), have a similar Model of charging by Country, AUD is up, so they take advantage of that, plus the fact that they simply can charge more and people continue to Pay.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2013)

jcollett said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > LR 5 is in beta. Does this mean no release except by subscription? I've got CS6, and I'm quite happy with DxO and Aperture, but maybe it's worth buying LR while I can, just in case... ???
> ...



Thanks!


----------



## Stu_bert (May 7, 2013)

on the current interview with Tom Hogerty via Engadget with Scott Kelby, where he mentions LR running on a tablet being in the works, I thought they mentioned a rental cost of 20 bucks per month for Photoshop - not sure if that included LR or not.

Given that an average Photoshop upgrade costs around 200 bucks / pounds, and comes out about every 18-24 months, then if they included LR into those costs, 20 dollars a month would not be completely out of sync, plus you get more regular updates on the programs.

Might not be soo bad if they can pitch the right pricing. Well, not too bad for anyone in North America


----------



## Mr Bean (May 7, 2013)

eml58 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > what a bunch of ***??!!! <insert any desired expletive
> ...


While I don't have too much of an issue with downloading the software, rather than shrink wrap (its the same code), I do have an issue when companies charge me more for being in the land of Oz. A few months ago, I went to buy Lightroom. From the Adobe "Australian" site, it was around $220. At B&H, the shrink wrap (and hence the license key) was around $125. So, I bought the shrink wrapped version, along with a few other goodies from B&H 
Upgrading my CS5.5 will be a different saga, as I can only get the upgrade from the Australian site, which will sting me around double (or a considerable mark up) of that from the US. At the end of the day, it's the same code.


----------



## eml58 (May 7, 2013)

Just read this on Mac Rumours, seems reasonably clear


http://www.macrumors.com/2013/05/06/adobe-announces-new-creative-cloud-apps-abandons-creative-suite/


----------



## Halfrack (May 7, 2013)

I currently have a Creative Cloud subscription. I got in way back at the $30/month price, which I am quite happy with. I wouldn't purchase the full product or suite otherwise - I can't justify the cost. I had LR3 as stand alone software, but for the most part, the whole idea of shelling out $2,500 for the full suite or $900 for an application like Photoshop is too much for me. $50 is a bit high, but to get literally every Adobe application Adobe makes, it is a better value than the 2-to-3 release upgrade issue that most folks do.

It calls home once a month to verify the subscription was renewed, but other than that, it acts just like boxed software. There are some creative cloud only plugins currently, and I hope they continue to add features to it. The license is for 2 computers, 1 user - so if I have a Mac and a PC, I'm covered with current releases on both machines.

To end 'boxed' software is just the evolution of the 'app store' model. It would be nice to have an 'Essentials Cloud' of the express products plus Lightroom, but this as a whole is a good step forward.


----------



## Aglet (May 7, 2013)

how many PS freaks are NOT gonna want to send Adobe their $ when they see how easy some of the new tricks are to use?..

a few good video examples here:

http://photorumors.com/2013/05/06/adobe-announces-photoshop-cc-available-only-through-monthly-subscription/#more-42668

I don't think I'd mind "renting" the SW if it was on a per-day basis. I'd readily give them $2 to almost $10 per day for only those days I'm using it. Heck, $1/hour then would be even better for me!
There are times I may go for months w-o using PS now, or even LR. Nothing I dislike more than paying for what I'm not using.


----------



## pdirestajr (May 7, 2013)

I use Camera Raw to do all my processing, and I noticed that they stopped updating the profiles in CS5 (which I have at work), but they add(ed) them to CS6 (which I have at home).

So I guess eventually no new lens profiles for people that don't "upgrade" to CC.


----------



## Meh (May 7, 2013)

Well, the usual human resistance to change is in full force today... photographers all throughout the Interwebs are losing their collective cool over this. The sky is falling the sky is falling.

People please! You never owned software, what you always bought was a license with only a time limited assurance of support, bug fixes, etc. Then you upgrade to the next version at semi-regular intervals and so it goes on for eternity.

I get people's uncertainty and concern about costs. For photographers who use nothing but PS and LR, the $49 per months is definitely higher than the 18-24 month upgrades. If you didn't upgrade every release then sure, it's a fair bit more. But you're getting more... new features, some cloud storage, access to other Adobe apps that maybe you'd like to use occasionally, and you get to install on two computers. Not everyone has a desktop and a laptop so that's not a benefit to everyone but I think it may be for many/most photographers?

For people still using CS4 who are complaining, don't worry and keep using CS4. Seriously, if you haven't upgraded yet you weren't going to anytime soon. And, they clearly said they're going to keep selling CS6 as a stand-alone for the foreseeable future so you'll still be ok.

Many news reports state that Adobe claims they're going to reduce the price of single aps to $10/month but I can't find it only any official source. If true, that's cheaper than upgrading PS once ever two years.

I dont' know guys and gals. Doesn't seem so bad to me but I'm one who's long accepted that I don't really own anything anyway and have no issue that songs I buy digitally can't be left to my kids when I die. Poor Bruce Willis and his extensive music collection will just have to suck it up.

If, as some are proclaiming, this is a big mistake for Adobe and it opens the competitive door to other photo applications then Adobe will tweak their pricing a bit. Time will tell. And life will go on.

Eventually, there will be features that even you die hard CS4 users are going to want and you'll be paying that monthly like a trained monkey... you pay your cable and phone bill every month right? What bigger rip is there than that? $12/day for 3 grande lattes? $2/bottle for "natural spring water"?

Onward and upward dudes! To the cloud!


----------



## Maui5150 (May 7, 2013)

eml58 said:


> wsheldon said:
> 
> 
> > jhanken said:
> ...



What are you talking about?

The Creative Cloud is currently single user mode as well. 

You want to subscribe to the CC, it is $30 / mo first year, and then $50 a mo for the 2nd year. If you want to just do 1 month, it is $75. you also can do PS alone, which I think is like $15 a mo.

Couple of things. $30/mo is for 1st year only. Months 13+ is AT LEAST $49... and nothing to say year 3 or 4 they do not raise the price. 

I GUARANTEE you, that as they add features or "upgrades" you can expect $75 - $100/ month for Creative Cloud.

Not sure on LightRoom. From the release I saw from Adobe, it looked like EVERY UPGRADE was going to Cloud only as of June 17. So maybe LR5 comes out before then. Now LR is currently an "Also Included" in the Creative Cloud, and looks like main software is Photoshop, In Design, Illustrator, Premiere, DreamWeaver, AfterEffects and Muse, so LR might still be stand alone, but still not good.

Long and short, for Creative Cloud, at minimum 2 year cost is $960. I expect year 3 to go up as well... whether $59 or expecting $69, you can expect the 5 year cost of the cloud to be around $3000 - $3500


----------



## rpt (May 7, 2013)

Meh said:


> Onward and upward dudes! To the cloud!


Yes. *But* not at $50 a month! That is a ripoff. Plus it should be configurable. Just like now to pick and choose what one wants.


----------



## unfocused (May 7, 2013)

The more I think about this the angrier I get. 

Just a few thoughts: 

I took advantage of Adobe's offer for a discounted upgrade to CS6 last year. Catch was, it was download only. So, while I have it on my computer, I don't own any disks. My computer crashes, I have to go through Adobe to have it authorized on the new computer. So, suppose I decide to take a pass on their "generous" offer and stick with CS6? Well, eventually I'll need to replace the computer and then, guess what, no way will Adobe give me access or unlock the software once they've gone to this system, you can bet on that. 

So, unless you have a computer that will never die, don't count on being able to access your existing versions forever. 

Now, they are going to sucker people in with their "introductory" pricing. So, what happens in a year when they jack up the price? Will I be able to go back to CS6 or will that have been disabled because I upgraded to "cloud?" 

Main thing I'm getting at is this: even if you own disks from a previous version, don't think for a minute you will be able to reload them onto new machines or use them forever. 

Others have rightly pointed out that all your images will be held hostage and if you let your subscription lapse you are screwed. 

I'm not at all buying that customers like Adobe Cloud as much as the company claims. Naturally, since people have had a choice, the only people who migrated to the "Cloud" option were those for whom it made financial sense. Of course, they are going to like it, they made a choice and that's what they picked. But, you can be sure Adobe never asked people who didn't migrate how they felt about it. 

I sincerely hope that this becomes Adobe's "New Coke" moment. 

Finally, there is a part of me that – being optimistic – hopes this prompts some real competition in the market.


----------



## YuengLinger (May 7, 2013)

Why is Adobe so afraid of letting customers decide? They could still save on boxes and discs by making their products available as one-time purchases via download.

C'mon, Adobe, give us a choice. If we want to pay full-price up front, you get a little surge of revenue. If we want to pay by the month, you get your stream.

I just hate how Adobe keeps lying to us by saying it is better for the customer this way.

And for those Adobe apologists (fewer and fewer), what is wrong with choice?

The best comments on this thread are the ones that point out this should open the door for competition.

As for me, PS CS6 will suffice for several years; hopefully during that time, the CEO who has sanctioned this will get thrown out on his arse, as did the JC Penny arrogant fool. 

And maybe that will also be time enough for savvy competitors to come up with something as good or better than PS CS6, which, powerful as it is, still relies heavily on aftermarket plug-ins to be efficient enough for many professional photographers and photo-editors.


----------



## dslrdummy (May 7, 2013)

eml58 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > what a bunch of ***??!!! <insert any desired expletive
> ...


We're used to it. We get charged a premium on cameras, lenses, memory cards and all mannner of accessories. Add to that any computers or other tech items you might want to mention. Why would software be any different? Somebody forgot to tell them our dollar is worth better than USD$1.02 and has been for the last year.


----------



## Maui5150 (May 7, 2013)

unfocused said:


> The more I think about this the angrier I get.
> 
> Just a few thoughts:
> 
> ...



I think you are missing the point.

I am sure a lot of people are happy with the cloud at $360 for a year.

When that rises next year to $600, will as many people be happy... probably not.

When it rises again in year 3 and year 4 and people realize they have paid $2000 over 4 years to RENT the software, and the month they stop paying the next month they stop using.

What most of the lemmings don't realize is just how big a choice they are losing. Once you jump to the cloud, it is no longer do you stay with the version you are on or upgrade... it is do you use the software or not.

Why is Adobe doing this... because it is HUGE money and a captive slave audience.


----------



## unfocused (May 7, 2013)

Maui5150 said:


> I think you are missing the point..Once you jump to the cloud, it is no longer do you stay with the version you are on or upgrade... it is do you use the software or not.
> 
> Why is Adobe doing this... because it is HUGE money and a captive slave audience.



Maui, I don't want to get this off track, but what point was I missing? You are saying almost exactly the same thing I said.


----------



## TAF (May 7, 2013)

Meh said:


> People please! You never owned software, what you always bought was a license with only a time limited assurance of support, bug fixes, etc. Then you upgrade to the next version at semi-regular intervals and so it goes on for eternity.



No, I bought that software and I expect it to function as purchased FOREVER - on my stand-alone machine that has no connectivity to the outside world.

Support, bug fixes, etc. are options I can chose to forgo, or pay for, my choice.

The real problem is that when Adobe goes bankrupt in 5 years and the license servers go off line, every one of their subscribers is SOL. It's happened before, it will happen again.

Which is why the cloud subscription model is a loser for anyone who cares about what they are using/doing/counting on. A business person (eg: professional photographer) who uses Adobe is rolling the dice with their livelihood. Bad move. You're not a secured creditor, they owe you nothing when they fail, and your customers are not going to be amused when you tell them that all those photos you were going to have for them aren't going to show up.

Onward and upward? More like downward to the netherworld.


----------



## Meh (May 7, 2013)

Maui5150 said:


> I GUARANTEE you, that as they add features or "upgrades" you can expect $75 - $100/ month for Creative Cloud.



Guarantee? That's pretty bold. But ok, it is reasonable to expect that prices go up over time but if that's your assumption then the cost of one-time version upgrades would also go up. At the end of the day the financial comparison is what you're paying now versus what you'll be under the new model.

If you're a PS only user your upgrade cost every two years was $300 (do I have that right or was it $200?) so your average monthly cost was $12.50 (more if an upgrade came out after 18 months). Now you're paying $20 per month for PS... which is more and not insignificant but you're getting constant upgrades with new features instead of Adobe having to hold them back for a full new release, some cloud storage, and the right to install on two computers. So there is extra value. Whether those extras are worth an extra $7.50 per month to any particular user is hard to say.

EDIT... and there are reports they are planning to reduce the single app price to $10 per month.


----------



## unfocused (May 7, 2013)

Okay, one more thing. We can complain all we want on this forum, but please, also go to one or more of the public Facebook pages for Adobe, such as https://www.facebook.com/Photoshop?fref=ts and post a comment there. 

Companies don't like public humiliation and in this era of the Internet and social media, it can be the most effective tool. Please, go post your opinion and urge others to do so as well.


----------



## fugu82 (May 7, 2013)

I may have to revisit Gimp......


----------



## cayenne (May 7, 2013)

A couple of thoughts.

1. With the subscription only model, what incentive does that give Adobe to innovate and come up with *NEW* features and bug fixes? I mean, the main reason people updated was new features. If they have you the short and curlies renting the software, what incentive do they have then to come out with regular and meaningful updates on a regular basis?

2. I have pretty strong faith in the hackers and crackers out there, I"m guessing at some point, they'll have a "fix" for the software phoning home, likely have it talk to an app. locally on your computer when it needs to check in.

I think, however, it kinda blows they're doing this. Sure, it might open up room for competition, but from where? What out there is close to PS ? There's the open sourced GIMP application, but it needs a lot of work to bring it more up to speed with PS.

Me? Well, I've been talking about it...and now I"m gonna hurry up and do it.

I"m gonna register with one of the local community colleges here, for $50, you don't even have to sign up for classes, and you can get an EDU ID, which is all you need for getting the Student/Teacher edition of CS6.

Its fully functional, and according to the FAQ and TOS of Adobe, perfectly usable for commercial, for $$ work.

I'll get that at a reasonable price, and won't worry about upgrading until someday when/if Adobe changes their tune on the subscription only model.

Just my $0.02,

cayenne


----------



## Meh (May 7, 2013)

rpt said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > Onward and upward dudes! To the cloud!
> ...



Under the new subscription model you can pick and choose what you want. Currently it's $20 per month for individual apps and if you need 3 or more apps you can just pay $49 and get everything else for FREE if you want to use them. You just have to compare what you are paying now, for upgrades, over time and compare to paying the monthly fee.

There are reports today that Adobe said it was going to reduce the single application price down to $10 per month when CC is released. If so, if you use 4 or less apps you go for the singles, and once you hit 5 you pay the package price and get everything.


----------



## Meh (May 7, 2013)

TAF said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > People please! You never owned software, what you always bought was a license with only a time limited assurance of support, bug fixes, etc. Then you upgrade to the next version at semi-regular intervals and so it goes on for eternity.
> ...



Oh bollocks!

The software that you currently own WILL work forever on your machine. No one is forcing you to upgrade to CC.

You want choice... that was part of my original point, people are resistant to change, don't like new models, demand choice, demand control over everything.

Adobe goes bankrupt? It could, but you images are not lost, your RAW files are not lost. You have to back them all up just like you do now. No difference there. Ok, so you Adobe software stops working after a while but even under the current perpetual license versions you'd eventually (and within a relatively short time) have to move to another product to stay current with features etc. And besides, when companies fail they don't go poof in the middle of the night... you'd have some warning... you're not going to suddenly have to tell your customers their photos have been lost forever in a black hole.

Boy oh boy, THE SKY IS FALLING!


----------



## Meh (May 7, 2013)

cayenne said:


> A couple of thoughts.
> 
> 1. With the subscription only model, what incentive does that give Adobe to innovate and come up with *NEW* features and bug fixes? I mean, the main reason people updated was new features. If they have you the short and curlies renting the software, what incentive do they have then to come out with regular and meaningful updates on a regular basis?



That's reasonable concern. The answer is competition. If Adobe falls behind in features, performance, etc. competitors will rise up.


----------



## Mr Bean (May 7, 2013)

cayenne said:


> A couple of thoughts.
> 
> 1. With the subscription only model, what incentive does that give Adobe to innovate and come up with *NEW* features and bug fixes? I mean, the main reason people updated was new features. If they have you the short and curlies renting the software, what incentive do they have then to come out with regular and meaningful updates on a regular basis?


Good point.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 7, 2013)

woollybear said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I'm thinking Adobe hired that ex-ceo from Netflix
> ...


 
They both tried to change the business model, cost their companies billions, and lost their jobs.


----------



## CarlTN (May 7, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Its certainly good news for the competition. Adobe has always been out of touch with their pricing.





unfocused said:


> Okay, one more thing. We can complain all we want on this forum, but please, also go to one or more of the public Facebook pages for Adobe, such as https://www.facebook.com/Photoshop?fref=ts and post a comment there.
> 
> Companies don't like public humiliation and in this era of the Internet and social media, it can be the most effective tool. Please, go post your opinion and urge others to do so as well.



+2!!


----------



## Maui5150 (May 7, 2013)

Meh said:


> Maui5150 said:
> 
> 
> > I GUARANTEE you, that as they add features or "upgrades" you can expect $75 - $100/ month for Creative Cloud.
> ...



Last upgrade was $199, and almost certain there was an early bird or sale at one point... Could have sworn I paid $149. 

The big difference is... Once I have paid, I get to use that software as long as my system runs. I think my 4 year cost on Photoshop is in the neighborhood of $450. I skipped one of the upgrades in there. With the CC, that is looking like $960 outlay over 4 years if the $20/month sticks. 

But again... If I don't think the upgrade is worth it, I don't pay. I can still use the software this year. Next year, and with as cludgy as their install is, chances are even if I build a new machine, I can get it installed. 

That is also not to say as OS changes, you also don't pay for software you don't need. Take Lightroom. Many people still run Windows 98. They don't need 7 and looksy, Lightroom 4 does not run on it. 

So for those running PS CS 6 on Windows 7 for example, 2 years from now whether it is Win 8 or what ever is next, if the PS CS 8 only runs on this new OS, you are stuck paying for a subscription for software you can't use, where the hard copy model, you save money.

Rent-Only software sucks!


----------



## Hobby Shooter (May 7, 2013)

Currently living in Asia, you can pick up a DVD of almost any known software for a couple of dollars. I make a point of always buying legal licenses from the vendors no matter what it is. I don't see the value of Ms Office on my home PCs though so I have downloaded Open Office to all of them. For editing I use LR and of course it's a legal copy.

My point here is that this will pi$$ people off even more than before seeing these companies making it more and expensive and difficult to stay legal Like someone said here also, who needs another monthly bill to look after? Better to just be able to buy it and forget about it.


----------



## TAF (May 7, 2013)

Meh said:


> TAF said:
> 
> 
> > Meh said:
> ...



True, your raw images are still there. And all the work you did that you saved as jpegs or tiffs are still there. But your entire workflow, all the modifications you made, and which require their software to retrace and modify, are gone.

And no, you won't have any warning they are going away, unless you are an insider. They DO go poof in the middle of the night.

Meaning that if you take your photography business seriously, you have to freeze your baseline right here, and can no longer rely on their products beyond where we are at. So there will be no updates, no new RAW converters. That is the fast track to the grave for Adobe. Self fulfilling prophecy.

Although I imagine that most of the younger folks will be seduced by the latest and greatest. Until they get burned, that is. But then, I was in the personal computer industry back when the 8080 was the latest and greatest, and Bill Gates was still in knickers. So I've already been burned, and won't trust any of these companies.

The Cloud - a mainframe (even if it is made up of distributed elements) by any other name is still something outside your control. Do you really want to go back there? What's next - punch cards?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2013)

Maui5150 said:


> Rent-Only software sucks!



Yes, renting sucks...except that it doesn't, for the landlord. When it comes right down to it, that's why this is happening.


----------



## Meh (May 7, 2013)

TAF said:


> And no, you won't have any warning they are going away, unless you are an insider. They DO go poof in the middle of the night.



Outside of the financial industry, it is very rare that a major corporation suddenly and without warning shuts it doors and leaves all customers out in the cold. 



TAF said:


> Meaning that if you take your photography business seriously, you have to freeze your baseline right here, and can no longer rely on their products beyond where we are at. So there will be no updates, no new RAW converters. That is the fast track to the grave for Adobe. Self fulfilling prophecy.
> 
> Although I imagine that most of the younger folks will be seduced by the latest and greatest. Until they get burned, that is. But then, I was in the personal computer industry back when the 8080 was the latest and greatest, and Bill Gates was still in knickers. So I've already been burned, and won't trust any of these companies.
> 
> The Cloud - a mainframe (even if it is made up of distributed elements) by any other name is still something outside your control. Do you really want to go back there? What's next - punch cards?



Again, the falling sky will get us all. Good grief.


----------



## RGF (May 7, 2013)

Stu_bert said:


> on the current interview with Tom Hogerty via Engadget with Scott Kelby, where he mentions LR running on a tablet being in the works, I thought they mentioned a rental cost of 20 bucks per month for Photoshop - not sure if that included LR or not.
> 
> Given that an average Photoshop upgrade costs around 200 bucks / pounds, and comes out about every 18-24 months, then if they included LR into those costs, 20 dollars a month would not be completely out of sync, plus you get more regular updates on the programs.
> 
> Might not be soo bad if they can pitch the right pricing. Well, not too bad for anyone in North America



I think $20/month for LR+PS would be a fair price. Even $30 for the entires suite is okay if it stayed there. 

My concern is price creep - $10 / month for 1 ap and then suddenly $20 or $25 / month. $500 / year seems very steep for those of us who don't make a living using PS. they may turn off a number of people and get them to move to PSE and Aperature on the Mac.


----------



## CarlTN (May 7, 2013)

I was thinking the same thing as you above, about the Netflix comparison. I wish I had owned their stock before they reported earnings a few days ago...it went up 25% in one day. But then, that's because the stock's price was rigged by all the big time firms and insiders. They deliberately hammered the stock ahead of time, so they could be long at a good price, in time for it's big "earnings surprise"...then they cash out.

Adobe may well be hurt by the cloud and subscription model. Time will tell. All I know is, I have all the photo software I need for now. I just bought a new camera, and doubt I will replace it within 3 years. And in that amount of time, who knows what will happen?

If Adobe's pricing strategy for a subscription service, means I have to pay $50 a month, if I make any money at all from photography if I use their software...there are certainly months where I would be losing money. Seems that would definitely drive their customers away. 

A similar thing has happened with higher education. You would think they're pricing themselves out of existence. Except they aren't going away, they're here forever, no matter how much they raise tuition, or how corrupt their boards are! The model is broken, the government is funding student loans with taxpayer "money"...which is really just adding to the deficit...and racking up more interest as it goes. I guess the bureaucrats figure if the public is willing to let the US Post Office lose $11 billion annually, or however much it is now...and is willing to waste billions on "investment" in "renewable energy", such as Tesla Motors, and Fisker Automotive (now bankrupt)...and "First Solar"...and billion dollar windmills...and million dollar "junkets" to Las Vegas by government accounting offices...Then they must also think the public is more than happy to flush their children's and grandchildren's futures down the toilet, in order for them to go enjoy their young lives in blissful ignorance...partying away with reckless abandon, even at ivy league schools...all on your dime...or even penny...which is really their future _negative _ dollar. Then when it comes time for those kids to go to job interviews, they start texting during the interview. Why? Because you raised them to be that way! You raised them to think they are the most important generation in the history of the world. The opposite is closer to being accurate. Then they have the nerve to go protest at a bank's front door...all while constantly texting on a smartphone whose maker is hording $140 billion in cash, overseas no less.


----------



## Meh (May 7, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Maui5150 said:
> 
> 
> > Rent-Only software sucks!
> ...



And like it or not, software subscription models are an inevitable outcome of the digital age because the systems are now available to make it work and it's a tool against piracy. All we can hope for, which is no different than at any time, is that healthy competition keeps things in check. If, as people are screaming, Adobe's pricing is crazy, insane, unreasonable, etc. then we should see some competition eventually. Bring it on and let's see how good our tools can get.


----------



## CarlTN (May 7, 2013)

Maui, do people really still run Windows 98?


----------



## kirispupis (May 7, 2013)

What I really want to know from this is what is Adobe's guarantee for quality? Most of the major services have what is called an SLA (Service Level Agreement). If they fail to provide a major feature for a certain period of time customers may receive a refund.

However, Adobe quality is simply abysmal. In the past I have waited months after a product release for them to sort out the bugs. I have no faith that Adobe can create a quality service.


----------



## RGF (May 7, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> woollybear said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



I wish there was more hazard. Remember the Deep Horizon. Who lost their job over that disaster?


----------



## jhanken (May 7, 2013)

> The software that you currently own WILL work forever on your machine. No one is forcing you to upgrade to CC.



Yes, as long as you don't add lenses or bodies. Competition is nipping around the edges here, with Nik/Google and others creating innovative stuff, and with Apple users having an alternative with Aperture.

I hope that pricing and usability don't take a turn for the worse. I will allow for the possibility that innovation will benefit.

My biggest concern is Lightroom. The whole pricing scheme seems to be tuned against frequent LR users that can get by with a slightly used version of Photoshop.


----------



## Halfrack (May 7, 2013)

Meh said:


> TAF said:
> 
> 
> > And no, you won't have any warning they are going away, unless you are an insider. They DO go poof in the middle of the night.
> ...



To point out a good reference, Adobe took down their activation servers used in CS2. So they put up new software packages and keys for those who would have been unable to activate their software.

Honestly, anyone afraid of loosing their edits and work in lightroom, when you upgrade, keep that install file around on your hard drive with all your photos. At any time, you can rent/borrow/upgrade/reinstall/virtualize a PC or Mac computer, install the 'dated' version of Lightroom and get a 30 day trial. Open your existing library and do a mass export of everything to TIFF.

Still afraid? I can't help you. Adobe is in an odd spot right now. Their tools are the industry standard. We as the creative public want tools that make things easier and allow us to work quickly when dealing with huge amounts of data. The technology isn't cheap, programmers aren't cheap, and theirs is a company that didn't have a reoccurring revenue model. Creative Cloud gives them revenue monthly, to help level out the stock price, and keep income and expenses balanced.

If you make your living with Adobe products, $600 / year is a cost of doing business. You write it off with everything else. The catch is those who only dabble in Adobe products, who aren't willing/able to spend the extra money. I don't see how Adobe is expected to separate those two user types without being abused.


----------



## M.ST (May 7, 2013)

Adobe made this decision because a lot of people without a business don´t pay for the Photoshop software (warez).

The other point is, that no personal computer in the world has the power for a oustanding new function.


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (May 7, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Okay, one more thing. We can complain all we want on this forum, but please, also go to one or more of the public Facebook pages for Adobe, such as https://www.facebook.com/Photoshop?fref=ts and post a comment there.
> 
> Companies don't like public humiliation and in this era of the Internet and social media, it can be the most effective tool. Please, go post your opinion and urge others to do so as well.



I just wrote, "BOO!" It was the shortest, most simplistic, response I could think of to Adobe's ignorance.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 7, 2013)

I'm surprised that this has just hit the headlines. A couple of months ago, Adobe faced an Australian government inquiry into their pricing structure. (CS6 is way overpriced here). The head of Adobe Australia made it clear that the current price of the boxed version of CS6 is irrelvant because they're moving everyone to creative cloud which is meant to have almost standard pricing worldwide. OK - I don't think he actually said that he actually said they were stopping the boxed version, but he made it quite clear that the future of Adobe was with online subscriptions. 

I'm still on CS4 and have recently been thinking of upgrading to CS6. Compared with buying, I actually thought that the creative cloud subscription looked like good value (at least here in Australia). While I'd prefer to buy the software, if a subscription works out cheaper, and the software works well this way, why not give it a go. Besides, there are several alternatives, if Adobe drops the ball.


----------



## Orangutan (May 7, 2013)

*Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Since Adobe has decided to go with a subscription-only model, it might be helpful to collect the community's knowledge of alternatives in one thread. If you have experience with alternatives to Lightroom, Photoshop, Bridge, Premiere, Acrobat or any of the other photo/video-related "Creative Cloud" applications, please share it here. It would be particularly helpful to mention:


Features that work well
Features that are missing, or don't work particularly well
Features that work fine, but require a different process or mind-set
Whether the application supports a "professional workflow" (i.e., fast, well-controlled, conducive to automation)
Whether the software is commercial or open-source
Platform: Windows, Mac, Linux


----------



## Quasimodo (May 7, 2013)

This sound like the start of a Harvard case! 

...., the CEO of Adobe Corporation was sitting on the redeye from Boston to NY. He could not shake the uneasiness he felt having left the meeting with the McKensey group. Their assesment of the business and subsequent strategic choices offered to the company, posed great challenges to the way the company and their shareholders thought about the business.....

[2023, HBS, Boston MA, in class]. Professor x "So Mike, give me an assessment of the predicament the Adobe Company was facing" Mike "Adobe who?" Professor x "Okay, just to set things in perspective.. Adobe was a very successful company in the first decade of this millenium, very much like Nokia was in the 1990's, and Apple was until 2010.....


----------



## Orangutan (May 7, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I took advantage of Adobe's offer for a discounted upgrade to CS6 last year. Catch was, it was download only. So, while I have it on my computer, I don't own any disks. My computer crashes, I have to go through Adobe to have it authorized on the new computer.



It's a safe bet that you can borrow someone else's DVD and re-install. Of course, you'll need to use your own license key.


----------



## eml58 (May 7, 2013)

Maui5150 said:


> eml58 said:
> 
> 
> > wsheldon said:
> ...



What I'm talking about is the option that may well be available to you, in Europe or the US, wasn't available to anyone in Asia until today, and in fact even today it's not available as Adobe's servers for Asia area are down today, so back off Meh and dish your agro to someone else.


----------



## Niterider (May 7, 2013)

Can't wait to see the stock prices plummet in the morning. Any profit gains in utilizing a cloud based program will be lost due to the loss in share price of the stock. 

Also if it can be used on a computer offline for 99 days, I assure you that this will be hacked and a bypass to the licensing server will be out within a couple days of the initial release. Don't underestimate the individuals out there who crack software. The top few hackers that develop these workarounds are light years smarter than anyone working at adobe. 

As an individual who purchased cs4 and cs5e, I will too not be a part of cloud based software marketing. I will be awaiting the pirated version, for all loyalty to such a company who shows such disregard to the interest of their customers has been lost.


----------



## drummstikk (May 7, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> woollybear said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



This has been repeated a couple of times in this thread, and it bears correction. The CEO of Netflix...is *still* the CEO of Netflix. Reed Hastings, despite multiple PR blunders, retained his position and Netflix is currently doing pretty darn well. Whether that is because of Hastings or in spite of him is of course open for debate.


----------



## Ladislav (May 7, 2013)

Subscription scheme is only for big professional products. I really don't believe it will target end user products (Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements) and Lightroom because they have completely different pricing strategy.


----------



## Bruce Photography (May 7, 2013)

scrappydog said:


> Dave_NYC said:
> 
> 
> > I've looked at their subscription stuff and it simply doesn't make sense for me.
> ...



+1 on "no interest in renting software". As a former programmer, I like the reasonable price on Photoshop upgrades for current Photoshop users. I have always tried to keep up to date because I've kept up to date on new cameras and I needed the new releases. I'd be ok with a new camera raw price on a per camera basis to pay for their support needs. Even a modest yearly charge for support makes sense ($50-100). But ANYTHING that says I have to run my system from the Internet is a NONE starter. I can't afford that degree of unreliability. As someone else has said, they will probably have you still download your copy of the program to your hard drive as usual. It is the constant connection to the internet that I don't want to be forced to have.


----------



## drummstikk (May 7, 2013)

I've never had any illusions that Adobe had any great interest in me as a customer. I get it. I simply have never given them enough money to earn that.

I bought my first copy of Photoshop, a shrinkwrapped box of version 3.0, at substantial discount as a surplus item from a book publisher that had purchased more copies than it needed. I've since upgraded to every second or third version, and am currently using version CS4. My last version upgrade was four or five years ago, and cost approximately $150. That means my monthly costs for the current version have been approximately $30 per year, a far cry from the $50 per month it seems they will be be asking in the future.

To add some further insult to this injury, the only other Adobe product I use with any frequency is Illustrator, and for that I'm currently running version 8.0 (vintage 1999) on old Mac G4 running OS 9 classic. While I do some illustration for my work, the majority that I do is as a hobby. Therefore I cannot really justify even the cost of an upgrade version, and I'm simply comfortable with the Illustrator 8.0 interface.

With the subscription model, it seems Adobe's disinterest in me as a customer has escalated to outright contempt. I've used Adobe Camera Raw within Photoshop for several years. I'm sure Lightroom is a great product, but just haven't given it a long-term test drive. I've been working with Apple's Aperture for several months now as an extended trial, and I'm still somewhat on the fence as to whether I will stay with it long-term. However, the subscription model from Adobe makes it much less likely that Photoshop will be in my toolbox in the future. (If Lightroom remains available as a standalone app, I will certainly give it due consideration in the future.)

It has long been rumored that Apple has its own version of Photoshop waiting in the wings, just waiting for Adobe to tick it off enough to actually pull the trigger on it. While Adobe's subscription model does not seem to be an affront to Apple directly, it does seem to leave an open market opportunity for a Mac App Store product. What is certain is that I will be taking a very close look at applications such as Acorn, Pixelmator, and GraphicConverter to see how well these apps can replace the functionality of Photoshop that I commonly use. None of these are likely to replace Photoshop one-for-one as the graphics Swiss Army Knife, but I would rather jump back and forth between two or three narrower-focused apps that I actually *own* for the functionality I need than get roped into a monthly subscription for what is, to be honest, a rather bloated app at this point. (Admit it. The majority of us only use a fraction of Photoshop's full capability.)

Anger at Adobe is justified, I think. But once you cool down it might be a good opportunity to take a look around and see what other choices are out there for the particular type of work you do.


----------



## cinema-dslr (May 7, 2013)

Wierd that we in europe have to pay 80$/month incl vat or 66$/month excl. vat for a digital product with no extra costs for Adobe? exept for the language package.

At least give me the choise to buy the english package for the english prices.
Still 50$/month is to much 30$/month would be just about acceptable to me


----------



## Click (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Good post. I will follow this thread closely.


----------



## tomscott (May 7, 2013)

For business this is an attractive package. I work for a small newspaper and we run 20 or so machines with CS5.5, its nice you can get the whole suite and seen as tho every machine is used 5 days a week for 8 hours with these aps in constant use it is worth it.

Also for those thinking adobe will produce poor upgrades check out their youtube channel there are some awesome additions to CC only already like Camera Raw being a photoshop filter! 

http://www.youtube.com/user/Photoshop

Terry White's Top 5 Favorite Features for Photographers in Photoshop CC

If anything the photoshop CC seems to be willing customers with the new features as they aren't available anywhere else. Here in the UK it is £48 a month for the whole suite. Seems pretty reasonable, I am a graphic designer/photographer and I use 80% of the applications in the suite daily. At home I use PS ID IL LR and Muse. But I dont see the updates being slow or non existent I think it will speed it up to get more people on board. Once you buy the software they have you where they want you and the need for upgrades is less. Whereas with the CC they are reaching a broader audience.

Also it depends what version you are looking at. The Full CS6 suite in the UK is £2550. Now if you sign up to the CC it will cost £600 a year, each version of CS has had a shelf life of 18-24 months. For that time scale it will be £900 or £1200 thats half the price. Although the problem is that if you decide to quit then you have nothing for your money. 

But at the same time I haven't been one to stay on older software, CS4 was slow CS5 was slow (on the mac side) CS5.5 64bit faster. CS4 wont work on Lion either so... IMO having the latest software to keep up with my kit is essential. Camera raw has moved on so far you are loosing out by not having the newest software especially in a competitive market such as print production.

So imo is depends on your situation. Really if you are an amateur a version of PS CS6 and lightroom 4 is a good combo but it will cost you more. But again it will be out of date in no time what so ever as CC takes hold. 

But for amateurs I see this sucking pretty bad, there will be another option on its way. Early days yet.

I have full faith they will not isolate amateurs.


----------



## DFM (May 7, 2013)

The mandatory move to CC subscription licensing only affects products in the current "CS6" range. Bundled products without a CS6 badge (*including Lightroom* and Acrobat, plus all the "Elements" versions) will continue to be available under perpetual licenses as they are now.

All paid CC members will have access to a select set of archived versions of the desktop apps. Starting with CS6, select older versions of the desktop creative apps will be archived and available for download. Archived versions are provided “as is” and are not updated to work with the latest hardware and software platforms.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (May 7, 2013)

DFM said:


> The mandatory move to CC subscription licensing only affects products in the current "CS6" range. Bundled products without a CS6 badge (*including Lightroom* and Acrobat, plus all the "Elements" versions) will continue to be available under perpetual licenses as they are now.
> 
> All paid CC members will have access to a select set of archived versions of the desktop apps. Starting with CS6, select older versions of the desktop creative apps will be archived and available for download. Archived versions are provided “as is” and are not updated to work with the latest hardware and software platforms.


Who are you? Adobe rep? Is that official info?


----------



## Old Sarge (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

I wouldn't be surprised if some new software appears on the horizon to challenge Adobe's place in the market. Seems like a good opportunity for a company to appeal to those not interested in cloud based software.


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

i hope adobe is doing a "Kodak".

for RAW development i use PHOTO NINJA more and more anyway. 
photo mechanic maybe can replace lightroom. 
or i have too look at DxO apps.

for video there are plenty of alternative apps.
i use NUKE for example.

photoshop, well it´s hard for me to replace it. 
but i hope that maybe corel or another company will make a real alternative some day.
something that is not only close but BETTER then photoshop.
corel sure has the knowledge... look at corel painter.

i know i know that is much to ask... but not impossible.

years ago z-brush came out of nothing (nearly) and big autodesk was not able to catchup with it´s own mudbox software. z-brush still rules.

i really hope someone takes the opportunity and creates something new and a real competition to photoshop. it sure will not happen overnight.


----------



## Maui5150 (May 7, 2013)

tomscott said:


> Also for those thinking adobe will produce poor upgrades check out their youtube channel there are some awesome additions to CC only already like Camera Raw being a photoshop filter!



Silly Silly Lemming. You don't think that is a coincidence. The "De-Blur" was pulled from the CS 6 release... why? To have a tasty carrot. 

If you think the Adobe prices will stay low and be lower than the current packaged upgrade model, you are foolish. 

This is "Rental Software" and a model that attempts to lock you in, and once they have you locked, you pay... or Opps... Sorry. You are no longer licensed, and for the PS community... all of those PSD files as well as any add-on filters... No longer work. 

Adobe sees the captive audience and like a crack dealer, just waiting to turn you out to get your fix.

Of course the CC Upgrade will have some great features. This is the hook... the one to get you to jump and then by in... They need BIG INCENTIVE to get people to be suckered into the cloud.

And hell, I already hear people saying it is only $30/month... That is the first year price... next year it jumps to $50/year and if you think it will stay there... you are foolish. 

For me, if they priced PS alone at $99/year LOCKED IN, I would bite at that. To me half of Adobe upgrades are crap and not worth the price, and given the last upgrade was $199, but CS6 was a big jump, spread over 2 years (5.5 was bs) $99 is reasonable. 

The rumored $10/month is still excessive to me, and $20/year insulting. 

I also want to see LOCKED IN RATES as well as another option that Adobe has not mentioned...

CONTINUED USAGE.

The CC Cloud is FANTASTIC for NEW USERS. If you are not using CS Suite or PS now, you get in for cheap... For those of us who already have a STAND ALONE LICENSED MODEL, I would like to see the Cloud Model be the upgrade model as well. There is no reason Adobe cannot provide UPGRADES to licensed current users and allow that upgrade to exist PAST the subscription. I.e require an annual subscription for upgrades, but if subscription lapses, the license continues.

How does this work? 

-- Some one like me who has licensed version of say Photoshop CS6 can use the cloud, subscribe for a year, and for software I already own, I get to continue with the software upgraded version PAST the subscription.

-- Lets say I don't have a current license for Illustrator. During my subscription period, I could use Illustrator, but once my subscription ended, I know longer could use. 

Part of what is being missed here is Adobe's big F&** Y&* to all current license holders who have paid for teh software. As a current holder of a license we should be able to pay for an upgrade and have continued use to extend the product we have purchased. 

There is absolute no reason Adobe cannot use the Creative Cloud as both a SUBSCRIPTION model for unlicensed users and an UPGRADE model for current licensed users, except getting a captive audience and then really pummeling them in the future


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 7, 2013)

LR5 will be ... for now... available as standalone app.
but i guess they will change that next year.


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 7, 2013)

Maui5150 said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > Also for those thinking adobe will produce poor upgrades check out their youtube channel there are some awesome additions to CC only already like Camera Raw being a photoshop filter!
> ...




+1 

some people are just so naive. :

as if adobe does anything because it loves the customers.
it´s all about maximizing profits.

and subscription price will be raised... and raised.. and raised.

and you have no other choice then to pay for it.
you can´t even decide to stick to your old software because CC will stop working if you don´t pay for the subscription.

oh and don´t get me started about the subscription cost in EUROPE... americans get it for cheap compared to us.


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 7, 2013)

M.ST said:


> Adobe made this decision because a lot of people without a business don´t pay for the Photoshop software (warez).



and the cloud will change nothing about that.
microsoft and others tried a server side activation... changed nothing.

there will be pirated cloud versions. no question about that.

but adobe can make more money, a constant cash flow from cloud based software.
instead of releasing new versions every 18 month.
and that is a big deal, as it makes things more predictable (R&D cost for example).


----------



## jm977 (May 7, 2013)

[/quote]

Last upgrade was $199, and almost certain there was an early bird or sale at one point... Could have sworn I paid $149. 

The big difference is... Once I have paid, I get to use that software as long as my system runs. I think my 4 year cost on Photoshop is in the neighborhood of $450. I skipped one of the upgrades in there. With the CC, that is looking like $960 outlay over 4 years if the $20/month sticks. 

But again... If I don't think the upgrade is worth it, I don't pay. I can still use the software this year. Next year, and with as cludgy as their install is, chances are even if I build a new machine, I can get it installed. 

That is also not to say as OS changes, you also don't pay for software you don't need. Take Lightroom. Many people still run Windows 98. They don't need 7 and looksy, Lightroom 4 does not run on it. 

So for those running PS CS 6 on Windows 7 for example, 2 years from now whether it is Win 8 or what ever is next, if the PS CS 8 only runs on this new OS, you are stuck paying for a subscription for software you can't use, where the hard copy model, you save money.

Rent-Only software sucks!
[/quote]

The real problem is slightly different. Those of us who will try to milk CS6 for as long as possible will be forced to upgrade to CC when and if we update to a new OS. Eventually Win7 will be Win8 (only) or Win9 or who knows what. And lo and behold, CS6 won't work on it so you won't even have your old software to putter around with. That's what I find even now when it comes to upgrading. It's usually about the OS and support for programs for older OS or plugins support for older OS or older versions of photoshop. Those of us who make money using this software will one day find we have no choice but to shell out an obscene amount of money and will have no choice as with all our other expenses but to pass it on to the couples getting married. They are the losers in all of this. Sadly, I've grown too accustomed to using photoshop lo these many many years and don't see a viable alternative. There are raw converters out there but I'm used to using so much more in photoshop itself after converting that I'm going to either accept CC or spend serious time and effort to find an alternative and figure out how to make it do what I need it to do. Darn you Adobe.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

The rant thread about Adobe's new subscription model is 6 pages long and growing fast. The thread about alternatives is a mere four posts long, only one of which actually names any software. Makes it pretty clear that no matter how much ranting there is, Adobe can do what they like.


----------



## PaulTopol (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Capture One does an *Excellent* job.

Shoot it right and you almost don't need P$.

These big companies almost ask to be pirated.


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



PaulTopol said:


> Capture One does an *Excellent* job.
> 
> Shoot it right and you almost don't need P$.




well.. that´s a bit narrow minded.
you can´t do collages with C1 or anything that need more then simple image "correctings".

ask joel grimes...


----------



## AprilForever (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



neuroanatomist said:


> The rant thread about Adobe's new subscription model is 6 pages long and growing fast. The thread about alternatives is a mere four posts long, only one of which actually names any software. Makes it pretty clear that no matter how much ranting there is, Adobe can do what they like.



I have the same sick feeling. The two best competitors seem to be GIMP and Paintshop. Neither really cut the mustard. So what remains? Shell out WAY TOO MUCH (seems like twice as much!!!) for Photoshop, the only program I really use (and can we quit calling them apps, Adobe? THEY ARE PROGRAMS!!! Let them be themselves.) 50 bucks a month over 4 years (my update period) is a LOT MORE than PS. This is a major increase in price, and Adobe is well aware of that. They think they can sit in their ivory towers and forever dictate an increasing tax on the serfs to use their software. I have no issue with a company selling its product for an honest price, but this is rather a monopoly, with a keen edge on gold extraction.


----------



## pwp (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



PaulTopol said:


> Capture One does an *Excellent* job.
> Shoot it right and you almost don't need P$.



C1 is very cool software...but you said it; you _ALMOST _don't need PS. For any moderately advanced work, PS is still the only player on the field. 

I expect we will see a big surge in sales of PS Elements which must have at least 80% of the functionality of PS. 

FWIW I have just done the Creative Cloud subscription...I also kept buying petrol when the price went past $1.00 per litre. I've also got MS Office 365. Get used to it, life's too short. Why sweat the small stuff?

-PW


----------



## adhocphotographer (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

I came across Gimp many years ago as a free bit of software, and now have it on my work computer instead of PS...


----------



## Tanja (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



adhocphotographer said:


> I came across Gimp many years ago as a free bit of software, and now have it on my work computer instead of PS...



i don´t know how someone can compare gimp to photoshop.
it´s like comparing a porsche to a fiat uno.

yes both are cars but what a difference.


----------



## Orangutan (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



AprilForever said:


> The two best competitors seem to be GIMP and Paintshop. Neither really cut the mustard.





Tanja said:


> i don´t know how someone can compare gimp to photoshop.



Can you be more specific? What are are the top three specific features/capabilities that are absent or inadequate in those other products? Better yet, what would it take to induce you to try them again? Last I checked, GIMP was limited to 8-bits per channel, but they have been actively working on 16- and 24-bit support, and expect to have it implemented fairly soon. What other specific features are lacking?

I see this as a moving target: sure, right now there is nothing that replaces PS for photo professionals; but what about one-year, two-years, three-years from now? What would it take to get there for you?


----------



## emag (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

As a hobbyist, I use GIMP but prefer Photoshop. PS will no longer run on my laptop for unknown reasons, but both PS7 (10+ years old?) and CS2 run fine on my desktop. I've only started using Lightroom (3.2) in the past year and will purchase LR4, but it looks like my Photoshop days will be drawing to a close. Frankly, I'll miss it. Adobe is not the 900lb gorilla in the room....it's the only gorilla, but it is soon to be priced beyond practicality for me. For pro's and artists, it is the cost of doing business and may make more sense. I would pay $10/mo. for LR but would prefer an annual subscription for less than 120/yr. Guess we'll see how things work out, but without any real competition Adobe can do what they want for now.


----------



## pdirestajr (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Lightroom isn't a part of CC.


----------



## aj1575 (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

This is mostly specific for OS X.
For picture managment I use _Apple Aperture _which also can do some simple PP task (actually it can do quite a few, but I don't like the UI that much; but watch out, the next version could be much better)

Then there is Lightzone, this software was abandoned a while ago, but it is becoming an opensource project for OS X, Windows and Lunix (www.lightzoneproject.org). I love the way this program works; it is very easy to handle and gives good results in a short time

And for doing some more work, like merging together different pictures and that stuff that is not "traditional" PP I just bought _Pixelmator_; not really profesional grade, but it has the feature that I need, and it is rather cheap.

I think unless you really are a pro (which you obviously are not, since then you would be out shooting, instead of posting on the Canonrumors Forum [/kenrockwell]), there are many alternatives to PS which cost much less.


----------



## Kristofgss (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Photoshop elements, lightroom and paintshop pro seem to be the most common alternatives although elements and paintshop are more graphic editing whilst lightroom is more photographers tools.
GIMP (tried it, but never really liked it)

For Apple: Aperture or Photostudio (and after working with windows 8 for a while, I must confess that that platform becomes more tempting by the day)


----------



## 2n10 (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



pdirestajr said:


> Lightroom isn't a part of CC.



This is what I have read and there are blog post on Adobe about Lightroom being separate from PS.


----------



## pensive tomato (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



2n10 said:


> pdirestajr said:
> 
> 
> > Lightroom isn't a part of CC.
> ...



Lightroom has always been a separate product from PS. You do get it as part of CC, but it's still available as a standalone product either as a regular license or individual subscription. I understand that bloggers were saying that this will remain the case in the future.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

I find Nuance PDF Converter better value than Adobe Acrobat and use that for my business.

I also use both Photoshop and CorelDraw for poster and brochure design. While I prefer Photoshop, I could happily use either. FWIW, I think CorelDraw is easier to use.

Apart from scanning (which CorelDraw handles as well), the only "photographic" thing I do in Photoshop is colour channel switching for infrared photos (why can't they introduce this into Lightroom?). I have used GIMP for this and it worked well - but I'm not a big fan of the interface and how the program operates. I'm sure CorelDraw does this as well.

Hmmm...Corel also have video editing, PDF programs, WordPerfect, web design software, and photo editing software. Maybe its time to buy some shares.


----------



## unfocused (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Unfortunately there isn't a good alternative to Photoshop right now. But that doesn't mean that will always be the case. 

Here is how I see this playing out over the next year:

1) Adobe succeeds in getting a lot of users to buy into the "Creative Cloud" system at the introductory price, but like Canon and Nikon have found with rebates, they soon learn that the reduced price becomes the expected price. Migrating those customers to the "real" price proves a lot harder than they thought. 

2) Many Photoshop-only users migrate to Lightroom and find that with third-party plug-ins they can find work-arounds for most photo processing. Adobe's investors start to wonder why the company made a decision that has people migrating from the more costly product to the less expensive product.

3) Corel suddenly finds itself a hot prospect for acquisition. Google buys Corel. First product is "Word Perfect by Google" which replaces Google Docs in the real cloud and a full version is offered for download at a deep discount. Microsoft starts scratching their head wondering "what did we do?"

4) Google's puts some cash behind Corel's graphic suite products, merges the NIK and Corel teams, promotes combined products at deep discount and uses the next year to upgrade the offerings to pro quality. 

5) Adobe watches its share price plummet and under pressure from investors revises its Creative Cloud plan. They announce that they have decided to offer permanent licenses on select products.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 7, 2013)

What happened to the days where a craftsman made an excellent product and then sold said product for cash? Oh yeah, pirates. :|

So to stop pirates, (which this CC won't) they will rent you said tool and if you make thousands of files with that tool and don't pay, instantly those are thousands of useless files. I don't like that idea, I'd rather just buy the tool. 

Am I strange?


----------



## RLPhoto (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Buy a copy of CS6 and only pay for LR thru CC or if they continue to use retail copy's. you can convert your RAWs to DNGs later on to continue editing in CS6 for years. 

That's my plan anyway.


----------



## RGF (May 7, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> What happened to the days where a craftsman made an excellent product and then sold said product for cash? Oh yeah, pirates. :|
> 
> So to stop pirates, (which this CC won't) they will rent you said tool and if you make thousands of files with that tool and don't pay, instantly those are thousands of useless files. I don't like that idea, I'd rather just buy the tool.
> 
> Am I strange?



Stoping the pirates is a laudable goal. Thief should not be tolerated. However for me (and I suspect many of us) the issue is cost. If I could get LR and PS CC for $150 /year with a long term commitment from Adobe that they would hold that price I could live with it.


----------



## RGF (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



PaulTopol said:


> These big companies almost ask to be pirated.



Does a large department ask for shop lifters? Do rich people ask to have their homes broken into?
Should carjacking of Porsche and Mercedes be condoned?


----------



## lilmsmaggie (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

TV is the thing this year, this year
TV is the thing this year
Radio was great, now, it's out of date
TV is the thing this year

1953, Dinah Washington "TV is the Thing (This Year)"



Fast foward to the new business model of the 21st Century of Software as a Service and Cloud based computing.

I hate to be the harbinger of bad news but its not just Adobe. It didn't start with Adobe and probably won't end with Adobe. Enter Microsoft, Apple, Salesforce, Google (downloaded Nik Collection recently?), state government and private IT datacenters, Drop-Box, etc. etc.

I work in the IT depart of a large California agency. Not only is our data center moving to a Software as a service (aka Cloud) model -- but we offer similar services to our direct customers for a flat rate fee, i.e. email, application development, hosting, etc. 

We've become a captive audience but instead of TV its software and other services. 
The 18 month software update cycle, licensing and revenue models have changed.

Fasten yer wallets boys - its gonna be a bumpy ride. They are the Borg -- Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.



The Cloud is the thing this year, this year
The Cloud is the thing this year
Perpetual licensing was great, now, its out of date
The Cloud is the thing this year


----------



## RLPhoto (May 7, 2013)

RGF said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > What happened to the days where a craftsman made an excellent product and then sold said product for cash? Oh yeah, pirates. :|
> ...



Lets suppose you decided to stop doing photography and designs. You have all those files neatly organized on LR and all those thousands of PSDs and you decide not to pay for software anymore. Well, you can't open those files and if you do need to just open one or two, you will have to pay the more expensive monthly fee for the month. Then you don't pay, then you need to open another file. Another monthly fee. 

So you decide to just pay the yearly fee, whilst you not even in the business of it anymore, to save $$$. Then you make more files with the new version of CC and the cycle begins again. 

This subscription scheme is just ludicrous. It puts the company in power, not the user, weither or not they want to use the tools provided.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



RGF said:


> PaulTopol said:
> 
> 
> > These big companies almost ask to be pirated.
> ...



The big question is should legitimate buyers and users be punished for the actions of these individuals?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

A alternative to Lightroom is ACDsee PRO, Not quite as good, but inexpensive and adequate. However, Adobe is not moving Lightroom to the CC as of yet. They know that its used by individuals, not companies with deep pockets.


Adobe is betting that enough people will signup for the CC to give them equivalent income after a year or two. They are alienating retired people like me who only use PS occasionally, and upgrade every other release. I've been using it since version 3.5.
My CS5 will keep on working and do what I need for years to come. I fully expect Adobe to Cave once they see that their bottom line is not what was predicted. Those paying $30/month to try it are not going to go for $50. I won't even pay $10 a month.


----------



## cayenne (May 7, 2013)

jm977 said:


> The real problem is slightly different. Those of us who will try to milk CS6 for as long as possible will be forced to upgrade to CC when and if we update to a new OS. Eventually Win7 will be Win8 (only) or Win9 or who knows what. And lo and behold, CS6 won't work on it so you won't even have your old software to putter around with. That's what I find even now when it comes to upgrading. It's usually about the OS and support for programs for older OS or plugins support for older OS or older versions of photoshop. Those of us who make money using this software will one day find we have no choice but to shell out an obscene amount of money and will have no choice as with all our other expenses but to pass it on to the couples getting married. They are the losers in all of this. Sadly, I've grown too accustomed to using photoshop lo these many many years and don't see a viable alternative. There are raw converters out there but I'm used to using so much more in photoshop itself after converting that I'm going to either accept CC or spend serious time and effort to find an alternative and figure out how to make it do what I need it to do. Darn you Adobe.



Not that difficult to 'milk' it for quite awhile.

Just install VMWare on your system (works great on Mac, Linux and Windows)...and you happily run your version of the OS that CS6 runs on till you are tired of using it.

cayenne


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



RLPhoto said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > PaulTopol said:
> ...



piracy has nothing to do with adobe going the cloud way.
and it will not help preventing piracy... adobe is not dumb, they know that.

the subscription model is simply a great way doing business... for companys.
you have a monthly income you can predict.


----------



## bigkeith (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

My workflow is a bit of a mess but this is my experience. I have CS4, Corel AfterShot Pro, Corel PaintshopPro X5, just installed (1week ago) LR 4 and PS 6 Extended. I found that LR has a better more intuitive workflow with the added bonus of the DNG conversion with loss less compression. But the tools available on both AfterShot and LR are basically the same. I would do basic editing or add special effects in CS4 then clean them up in PSP.  I like the ability to post straight to Flickr or Facebook from PSP rather than LR so I can have my "cleaned" up photos posted in a single step. Bought PS 6 because I am intrigued with the ability to do the 3D modeling rather than playing with the vector graphics. 

That being said. Aftershot is a cheaper alternative to LR and for someone who doesn't have to handle a large number of files it works well. PSP is a way cheaper alternative to PS but there are tools in PS that aren't either available in PSP or require more work. Also because the Adobe community is so large there are more plug-ins available as well as many different ways to learn to use PS. I've found the support from Corel abysmal and learning to use their products a bit of a learning curve you may have to do solo. As pointed out earlier GIMP is free and the user community is quite helpful if you are having an issue.

So bottom line is there are other alternatives to the Adobe product line it's just that Adobe is so entrenched in the market that even if Corel or anyone else for that matter produce better software than Adobe they have their disciple army and it is going to be really hard for them to lose their market position.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



Canon-F1 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > RGF said:
> ...



Exactly. Is adobe becoming greedy? Is it not enough that I'm willing to pay thousands for a copy of software?

How much is enough? They want you to pay nearly the same costs but now, you don't own to use the software.


----------



## Tanja (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

i am doing a lot of video.

when i don´t pay for adobes cloud anymore, because i decided to use another program, then all adobe programs will stop to work and i can´t even load my old projects. 

when i buy a creative suite i always have the software i bought at hand.. even after 4 years.


----------



## Ladislav (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

For hobbyists? Photoshop Elements. It has more features than most of warez Photoshop users will ever need. It also has limitations like 8bit processing only but it costs like one or two months of subscription to CC.

For professionals who makes money by photography? Either live with a new subscription model (that's just change in your costs) or buy CS6 now and wait what will happen in next few years.


----------



## Aglet (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



RLPhoto said:


> Buy a copy of CS6 and only pay for LR thru CC or if they continue to use retail copy's. you can convert your RAWs to DNGs later on to continue editing in CS6 for years.
> 
> That's my plan anyway.



Ditto.
if you already have LR3 or 4, and PS as CS 3, 4, 5, or preferably 6, then those of us who only use it occasionally or as a host framework for plugins are just fine for as long as we care to freeze our workflow.
As long as you can export your raw file into DNG or 16b TIFF you can continue to do a lot of work without really changing workflow. DPP, ViewNX, DxO, C1 and other 3rd party raw converters are there to do that.

I froze my OS and my PP software a couple years ago and despite what cameras I added it still allows me to continue working the way I'm comfortable with for years to come. I'll be taking one more iterative step with OS, PS and LR4 and then that machine gets locked down, no more major SW updates.

If you gotta have some g-whiz new feature then you're gonna have to keep payin' for it unless some competition steps up to take the place of PS.
I know the tech already exists, it's just not well marketed yet. Hopefully the authors will take this opportunity to push their software to improve customer awareness.

For some of the plugin suites, like Topaz, they already have a basic framework that allows standalone use. I think this kind of functionality may become a little more commonplace.

GIMP, and Corel and some other small players will now get some extra attention and hopefully improve feature sets and usability. Adobe's CC move is going to cause a bit of a shift in the whole ecosystem.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (May 7, 2013)

jhanken said:


> The Wall Street Journal is stating that Adobe is abandoning the packaged software model in favor of Creative Cloud, and plans no further release of Creative Suit after the current 6.0.


If I'm not wrong its been a year since they started Adobe Creative Cloud, but it is still not available in my region http://www.adobe.com/mena_en/products/creativecloud.html?promoid=JFQGY


----------



## cayenne (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



lilmsmaggie said:


> I hate to be the harbinger of bad news but its not just Adobe. It didn't start with Adobe and probably won't end with Adobe. Enter Microsoft, Apple, Salesforce, Google (downloaded Nik Collection recently?), state government and private IT datacenters, Drop-Box, etc. etc.



Err....yes, I bought the NIK Collection, but it isn't a service, and I don't have to pay more than once.
I downloaded the plugins, they work, and I don't have to pay again for them....


----------



## cayenne (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



Kristofgss said:


> Photoshop elements, lightroom and paintshop pro seem to be the most common alternatives although elements and paintshop are more graphic editing whilst lightroom is more photographers tools.
> GIMP (tried it, but never really liked it)
> 
> For Apple: Aperture or Photostudio (and after working with windows 8 for a while, I must confess that that platform becomes more tempting by the day)



What does regular Photoshop have that Photoshop Elements is lacking?


----------



## pdirestajr (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

I'm curious to see how this plays out in the real world for Adobe. I have a strong feeling that the factories I deal with in China won't be joining a "subscription" plan with Adobe. And then trying to convince every company to migrate over to this new platform? Most companies I have worked for don't upgrade every release. Usually they do it every other. Should be interesting.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2013)

Yeah, no way. I despite the 'cloud' model. Time to give that Capture One and Vegas Pro a look.
I also have just been reading some good things about PhotoNinja, maybe that will be good and can be used to feed stuff in PS CS6 in the future.

Just say no to the 'cloud' (for video too since the quality is awful compared to say blu-ray and you have no control over whether some title gets ranked from distribution to some battle or low demand or what not and no control over which version, extras, commentary, etc. and it will be ages before our internet infrastructure can deliver he vastly greater bandwidth to most homes that would be needed and even longer before the content providers would bother to encode in truly high quality and carry very version of every title on their servers and even then rights battles mean some title will go away, maybe even for long periods, from time to time)!

And say no for general software. I hate even online check in for initial registration because as soon as the company goes out of business there goes your game, locked out. Usually they don't even bother unlocking stuff before going under although a rare few do.

This Adobe stuff is a poor deal too. And what if someone hits a period where they need or want money to go elsewhere, boom locked out, can't ever put it off for a while. Awful. They have long had some of the worst customer service and worst policies and yet they have now managed to outdo even themselves.

For all the grief many give Canon at times, much of it deserved these days, Canon are like pro-consumer angels in comparison so maybe they aren't really so bad.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2013)

jhanken said:


> Here is CNET's take on the matter:
> 
> http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57582735-92/adobe-kills-creative-suite-goes-subscription-only/



"Customers "overwhelmingly" prefer it.

"But those who've carped about the Creative Cloud are a minority, Morris said.

"Overwhelmingly, when you compare the people who've complained about the new model to the people who loved it, it definitely skewed heavily to the new model," he said. "Obviously we would not be making a decision this big if the percentage of people in that category was so big it was the wrong thing for us to do." "

;D ;D ;D ;D     ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D : : :   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :'( ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D  : ;D ;D ;D

Yeah because that is why every single thread on every single forum on the net is, for the first time in the history of the internet, at 99% agreement levels on something (and hint the something is not 'overwhelmingly' in support) and barely even bickering at all.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2013)

Meh said:


> Onward and upward dudes! To the cloud!



Yeah how much did you get paid to parrot that silly slogan hah.
Such a silly name too, makes something very old in the world of computing sound new and fresh and exciting (OK maybe not a silly name, but a sneaky one).


----------



## lilmsmaggie (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

oh contraire mon ami - you had to download it from their server. That's the whole point of "Software as a Service." Either way you look at it, you will pay to play, stay with what you have or look for a more palatable alternative. Google will eventually move to the model for the Nik Collection. Most of their service offerings are already based on it.

And yes, software piracy does come into play in this game. Companies like Apple, Microsoft and Adobe that write software need to protect their revenues. Sure it won't stop piracy but it does allow the software companies to stay one step ahead of the pirates. Think about it: you ever download an evaluation or "trial version," of any software and have it stop working after the trial period expired. 

No buy license - no ticket to ride.

oh contraire mon ami ... just you wait and see.





cayenne said:


> lilmsmaggie said:
> 
> 
> > I hate to be the harbinger of bad news but its not just Adobe. It didn't start with Adobe and probably won't end with Adobe. Enter Microsoft, Apple, Salesforce, Google (downloaded Nik Collection recently?), state government and private IT datacenters, Drop-Box, etc. etc.
> ...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> woollybear said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



The ironic thing is that in JC Penny's case the change in business plan was actually better (well assuming it had worked) for both the company AND the customer. Unfortunately shoppers who shop at those types of stores are not rational and love to see ridiculous fake sale and suggest retail prices and waste time playing all sorts of games.


----------



## Lloyd (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



lilmsmaggie said:


> Fasten yer wallets boys - its gonna be a bumpy ride. They are the Borg -- Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.



I think you are correct they are the Borg. They seem to be even below the Ferengi in their business model as even the Ferengi know the importance of customers. Perhaps in their assimilation of the Ferengi they confused employee with customer in Rule 211 of the Rules of Aquistion which is as follows:

211. Employees are the rungs on the ladder of success. Don't hesitate to step on them.


----------



## Maui5150 (May 7, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> jhanken said:
> 
> 
> > Here is CNET's take on the matter:
> ...



Lets look at a few things here:

1) A great many of the people who already OWN Adope (and yes, I have formally renamed them A-Dope-E) CS Suite or similar batch of products, makes little sense to go to the cloud, especially if you already OWN all the products... so not sure the ranks, but I am willing to be a large number of Cloud users currently are those with little investment or installation base to begin with.

2) Their own logic is flawed:

Saw this quoted:

_*According to the company, it was just too hard on its engineering ranks to support products that get upgraded constantly as well as separate, packaged versions that only get upgraded roughly every two years.*_

yet two paragraphs later

_*It remains to be seen how customers, particularly slow-moving large businesses, react to seeing the software move to a more constantly changing service. Morris said that Adobe is creating a product that will allow the stodgiest of customers to stay on a particular version of the service (though they will still be paying on a monthly basis).*_

So if stodgy customers are still staying on older versions, hmmm they have the same support issues.

It is ALL ABOUT THE MONEY with Adope


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2013)

Maui5150 said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > Maui5150 said:
> ...



Man excellent point the stupid 'cloud' stuff could even force you to use OS you don't even feel like using yet. Wht if the next version requires Windows 9 and it still stinks and you don't want to change from 7 until Windows 10 or something?


----------



## hamada (May 7, 2013)

recieved a newsletter fom x-force..... "we are working on a solution"  

honestly, that will drive some customer away from adobe.
and i think that is GOOD for the industry.

i love to see more software and fresh ideas.

let adobe follow kodak!!!

nokia learned it the hard way too.... don´t ignore your customers.


----------



## meli (May 7, 2013)

There are still people running XP machines for the last 12years and judging by win8 adoption rates, some people will run win7s for another good 7 yrs. So CS6 can serve someone for quite a while. Actually the only problem in the long run might be the advent of affordable highres panels.


----------



## drjlo (May 7, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Okay, one more thing. We can complain all we want on this forum, but please, also go to one or more of the public Facebook pages for Adobe, such as https://www.facebook.com/Photoshop?fref=ts and post a comment there.
> 
> Companies don't like public humiliation and in this era of the Internet and social media, it can be the most effective tool. Please, go post your opinion and urge others to do so as well.



Good idea. Left my comment on their FB page as well.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2013)

Meh said:


> TAF said:
> 
> 
> > And no, you won't have any warning they are going away, unless you are an insider. They DO go poof in the middle of the night.
> ...



Hah! Do you know how many game companies and other software companies have gone under??
When it comes to that most are too bedraggled and desperate to even care about trying to toss out patches to remove protection (or still hoping that someone will buy them or certain items out inthe future and too afraid of losing out on that chance).

Same for music. Music Giants went under. Anyone who wasn't lucky enough to have updated the license on all their songs before they went under got stuck with tens, hundreds of useless music files (and even those files will go away unless you losslessly burn them and then losslessly re-capture them from disc before your current computer changes too much and the rights go away again). RIAA never bothered to help anyone get what they had bought back either, they were just like cool haha now they all have to buy stuff a second time.


----------



## hamada (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



lilmsmaggie said:


> And yes, software piracy does come into play in this game. Companies like Apple, Microsoft and Adobe that write software need to protect their revenues. Sure it won't stop piracy but it does allow the software companies to stay one step ahead of the pirates. Think about it: you ever download an evaluation or "trial version," of any software and have it stop working after the trial period expired.



lol.. warez user will have the CC and don´t have to bother about connecting every 30 days.. wager a bet?

a worthless protection but annoying for legal customers...that will be the reallity.
just like NO-DVD cracks for games. legal customers have to bother about inserting the original DVD... warez user just start a game.

the cloud will change nothing about that.
don´t be naive....
you don´t need a constant connection to adobe, so a crack will be made in no time.

just look at M$ and cracked local KMS server.

not that i justify piracy.. but these are the facts.


----------



## ablearcher (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



hamada said:


> lilmsmaggie said:
> 
> 
> > And yes, software piracy does come into play in this game. Companies like Apple, Microsoft and Adobe that write software need to protect their revenues. Sure it won't stop piracy but it does allow the software companies to stay one step ahead of the pirates. Think about it: you ever download an evaluation or "trial version," of any software and have it stop working after the trial period expired.
> ...



Spot on! This is exactly what is going to happen. Nothing to add here..


----------



## unfocused (May 7, 2013)

Can't stop commenting on this thread -- sorry.

One thing people need to understand is that to Adobe, "Cloud" is just a marketing name. This is not a true "cloud" application. Ironic for a software company, but apparently somebody in marketing thought "cloud" sounded cool and modern. 

As others have pointed out, the software gets downloaded on your machine just like today. The only difference is that if you stop paying, they nuke it. 

Also, when people do their calculations, many here are comparing the subscription price to the full version costs. And, yes, it can look like a good deal if you are new to the applications and have to buy a brand new full version. But, I suspect most people are "upgraders" like myself, who bought a full version years ago and upgraded and expanded their options when Adobe offered deals.

I think I probably started with one license for Pagemaker, got that converted to InDesign and then, as Adobe started offering bundles, they gave owners of individual products a decent (but still steep) price to expand. Point is, you should compare the price of this subscription to the upgrade price, not the full retail price. Second point on this, Adobe only upgraded a "full" step every two years - Release version 1 in year one, version 1.5 in year two and then version 2 in year three. The cost for the .5 versions was usually much smaller and Adobe considered the full number versions as the true upgrades. So, you really only needed to pay every two years to remain current. 

So, if you want to get an accurate picture of just how much more this is costing, take the cost of a two-year subscription and compare that to the cost of an upgrade. CS6 Design and Web Premium Upgrade right now is $375. Two year cost would be less than $16/month. So, even those on the "bargain" $20/month plan will be paying more and Adobe is only promising the $20/month price for one year.

Yeah, I'll probably go ahead and pony up for the $20 month plan in the first year. But I will be watching the market, watching what competition emerges and really evaluating my needs. As it stands now, I seldom use anything but Dreamweaver and Photoshop, with the occasional use of InDesign. Flash is dead, so that's of no use. I've kept buying because I figured it was worth the investment to stay current for the times when I do need one of the other programs, but now I will use the next year to take a serious look at what I do use and how often. Dreamweaver is fast becoming unnecessary with the growth of PHP. For the little I use InDesign, I can keep the CSS6 version pretty much forever. So the deciding factor will be what Photoshop competitors emerge.

Sorry for the long winded rant.


----------



## xps (May 7, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> jhanken said:
> 
> 
> > The Wall Street Journal is stating that Adobe is abandoning the packaged software model in favor of Creative Cloud, and plans no further release of Creative Suit after the current 6.0.
> ...



Where do you live? I just know the Rienz, a river in the south tyrol... esp Itay


----------



## Maui5150 (May 7, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Man excellent point the stupid 'cloud' stuff could even force you to use OS you don't even feel like using yet. Wht if the next version requires Windows 9 and it still stinks and you don't want to change from 7 until Windows 10 or something?



Well yes and no. They would not FORCE you to change OS.... you would be forced to pay for basically an upgrade you may never use.

What I have seen in the IT world is a lot slower adoption of Software. There are still windows XP and 98 machines in the wild, especially XP as well as look at Office and even though there is not only 2007 and 2010... a ton of people are still on 2003.

So the key for Adobe, is to get people to pay, regardless of whether they use the software. Even if Adobe does not jack up their prices,

5 year outlay = $2760
10 year outlay = $5760

What Adobe wants is for people to sign up for the larger package, find uses for products they may not use because they are there, and then SLOWLY and CONSISTENTLY take more money.

It is far easier to get $50/month out of someone that $3,000, and by selling the $30/mo first, most will forget when the price goes up since it will be just jammed in the middle of the Credit Card statement.

As well. Ever notice.

Creative Cloud = CC

Credit Card = CC

Basically this is Adobe Credit Card Charging Consortium


----------



## xps (May 7, 2013)

A swap to this model of using Adope CS6 will cause some problems for big organisations that have to secure their datas . 
The head of the IT department in the organisation where I work, is in doubt whether the state bureaus is allowing to open the firewall/safety-solutions to use this cloud based software. It is to risky. They are in fear to get hacked. 
And we own really a lot of CS6 licences.


----------



## Meh (May 7, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > Onward and upward dudes! To the cloud!
> ...



LOL nothing, I just happen to think 

a) This type of thing is inevitable and if done right (eventually) can be beneficial to everyone including customers. If Adobe products are no longer superior and pricing is too high then competition will appear and catch up.

b) The $20 per month for PS and $50 for everything is not as bad a deal as everyone is making it out to be. Yes, it's more money and for those that do not upgrade every release it's quite abit more. But there's added value in the new model for some users especially those with a desktop and laptop as they get to install to two machines.

Calling it Creative Cloud is a bit of spin since they are not really cloud applications but there is a cloud component. And besides, if they really were cloud apps that would be bad.


----------



## Meh (May 7, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > TAF said:
> ...



I know of many. But my point is not many "major corporations" suddenly and without warning shut their doors with no opportunity for customers to take appropriate action. The comment I was responding to suggested that if Adobe ever went bankrupt users would suddenly lose their image files and have to tell customers that their photos were lost. Not going to happen. If Adobe went bankrupt the world would have plenty of notice... they are a public company that reports quarterly, we would see their revenue and profit falling and that would be due to poor sales due to loss of customers likely due to poor products that less and less people want to use, etc. etc.


----------



## zim (May 7, 2013)

xps said:


> A swap to this model of using Adope CS6 will cause some problems for big organisations that have to secure their datas .
> The head of the IT department in the organisation where I work, is in doubt whether the state bureaus is allowing to open the firewall/safety-solutions to use this cloud based software. It is to risky. They are in fear to get hacked.
> And we own really a lot of CS6 licences.




xps this is the aspect that most interests me I'd be really interested to hear what your company does about that or indeed what Adobe's (or your suppliers) response is.


----------



## unfocused (May 7, 2013)

xps said:


> A swap to this model of using Adope CS6 will cause some problems for big organisations that have to secure their datas .
> The head of the IT department in the organisation where I work, is in doubt whether the state bureaus is allowing to open the firewall/safety-solutions to use this cloud based software. It is to risky. They are in fear to get hacked.
> And we own really a lot of CS6 licences.



Okay, repeat after me: This is NOT a cloud application. This is Not a cloud application.

From Adobe's website: _"And, as always, your applications live on your desktop, not in a browser and not in the cloud."_

It is just a confusingly-named marketing scheme.


----------



## And-Rew (May 7, 2013)

OK, i've sat and watched this discussion on various forums and have reached the following conclusion...

Adobe Cloud is without doubt a means of extorting money out of people because they think they now have control of industry standard software which people will have to keep subscribing to such as MS Office.

How many people still actually use MS Office, as opposed to a 'compatible' package. I do a reasonable amount of stuff on an iPad, and rest assured there is no MS Office app for that - and yet the docs still work with the official MS Office apps!

Then we come to 'industry standard' - has no one learned? Who here remembers the days when you would most likely 'build' your own PC - and you couldn't do it unless it came with a 'genuine Creative Labs Soundblaster Sound Card'? If you had sound issues - all you ever got off BBS was - 'hmmm - only designed to work with Soundblaster, change your card!' 

Last time i looked on the web, or visited a place that sells computers and components to build one with - i see nothing about Creative Labs or Soundblaster - do they still exist? :-\

I'm afraid i won't be signing up to any 'cloud computing agreement'. These are not main frames we are using - and we are not beholden to IBM to supply the required software. There are too many other versions of software out there for managing images - it might require some relearning and adjusting to different software ideology, but it will be mine and 'lesser' companies will be happy to take my money to provide such software.

Worse still for Adobe- Canon does a damn good job of providing some extremely respectable alternative software for free  If Canon were to suddenly withdraw the provision of said free software - then I'd get suspicious and ditch Canon - sometimes principles are more important than kit! :-\


----------



## woollybear (May 7, 2013)

unfocused said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > A swap to this model of using Adope CS6 will cause some problems for big organisations that have to secure their datas .
> ...



The problem I have, regardless of whether the software resides in the cloud, on your desktop or on Pandora, is a requirement for an internet connection so that every time you start the application a license check is performed. That would cause a great deal of heartburn on my part.


----------



## Pieces Of E (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

How about Canon's Digital Photo Professional? It ships free with cameras, updates are free and the program does a marvelous job at editing photographs. Who needs anything else? And why?


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



Pieces Of E said:


> How about Canon's Digital Photo Professional? It ships free with cameras, updates are free and the program does a marvelous job at editing photographs. Who needs anything else? And why?



well if you have to ask that question you obviously have never uses photoshop or done anything that has to to with image editing beside some color and exposure corrections.......


----------



## Pieces Of E (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Well maybe us who 'uses' only DPP don't have to do anything else with our photos than simple editing!


----------



## Niterider (May 7, 2013)

woollybear said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > xps said:
> ...



It is not going to be that restrictive. The licensing server will either need to be connected to once ever 30 days or every 99 days. I have heard both numbers from adobe representative, so I am not sure which is true. My guess would be 30 days though.


----------



## thepancakeman (May 7, 2013)

Niterider said:


> It is not going to be that restrictive. The licensing server will either need to be connected to once ever 30 days or every 99 days. I have heard both numbers from adobe representative, so I am not sure which is true. My guess would be 30 days though.



For photoshop, maybe not such a big deal. But it's my understanding that a lot of people that use the video production software very specifically have it on a PC that is NOT connected to the internet to reduce virus risk. I dunno, maybe that's old school. Either way, I'm already shopping for other options.


----------



## Harry Muff (May 7, 2013)

Adobe's stocks dropped like a whore's drawers this morning according to the iPhone Stocks app.


----------



## xps (May 7, 2013)

Niterider said:


> woollybear said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



And if it is 1 time a month, but it is an severe safety problem. My oranisation stores a lot of confident datas, on servers and on more then 2500 PCs. So each leakage is one leakage to much. Our IT-security management officer in chief got an little heart attack today, when he heared what he will have to allow. 

That will be an severe problem in future. But, if the first big organisation or company does not swap to the new productline, Adobe will react.


----------



## jm977 (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



RLPhoto said:


> Buy a copy of CS6 and only pay for LR thru CC or if they continue to use retail copy's. you can convert your RAWs to DNGs later on to continue editing in CS6 for years.
> 
> That's my plan anyway.



That's not a bad plan. The only thing I worry about is that Adobe does not update DNG Converter in the future so that it will convert say, 5D mark5, to DNG so that you can open it in CS6. That may go slightly against the point of what they are doing with CC. It would be polite of them to continue to support and provide for free, the DNG Converter. Unless someone's heard something I haven't. Trouble is there is a lot of conflicting info bouncing around right now and some dust needs to settle.


----------



## Schultzie (May 7, 2013)

This is from the FAQ:

You will need to be online when you install and license your software. If you have an annual membership, you'll be asked to connect to the web to validate your software licenses every 30 days. However, you'll be able to use products for 3 months (99 days) even if you're offline.


----------



## jm977 (May 7, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



Aglet said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Buy a copy of CS6 and only pay for LR thru CC or if they continue to use retail copy's. you can convert your RAWs to DNGs later on to continue editing in CS6 for years.
> ...



+1 on the plugin companies continuing the work on creating standalone versions. This ought to help in extending use of existing versions of PS. Workflow will slow but it may give time to someone to step up to the plate. PS is just so darned intrenched. I don't know if anyone even has the will or resources. What a dismal future.


----------



## deleteme (May 7, 2013)

I can understand the annoyance or even outrage of many who object to this change by Adobe. However it has been hinted at for several years through the gradual adoption of more cloud services and subscription. 

I was even told earlier this year that a sale of full, boxed copies of PS CS6 for $200 each through B&H was a push to clear out physical inventory in anticipation of the change.
That said, we have to take emotionalism out of the discussion and make a decision for our business.
The technical details about connectivity to the 'net are valid and I am sure Adobe will have answers for that if it doesn't have them already. 

Full disclosure: I have not read every bitt of info about the subscription service so I don't have answers for everything.

A few observations:

First: Photoshop has always branded itself a tool for professionals who, in theory, use top quality tools, are professionally trained and carry a certain business overhead as a consequence of that professionalism. The price of subscription is less than one tank of gas per month. If your business cannot handle that maybe you need to think about whether you have a real business. If you are a hobbyist see items three and four below.

Second: Ownership. When you buy a tank of gas you own it. When you use it ,you exchange it for transportation that (I hope) was useful or profitable to you. You rent a motel room and got something for a short period of time that was of value. I buy a new piece of gear on whether it makes money for me or not.

I buy toys that make me happy but I do not pretend that it is critical to my life.

The same for software. You rent PS and, as a pro, you use it create unique profitable image that the amateur with Picasa cannot. Then you can deduct it as an expense from the increased revenue like a real business would.
If you are a hobbyist, see below.

Third: Stick with what you have. Many are still using PS CS2. CS6 is wonderful but I scratch only the surface of the program and I am a fairly adept user. This is where Windows users benefit as they can use a huge range of versions whereas Mac users are stuck where their HW/SW combinations leave them.

Fourth: There are alternatives to PS and LR that permit ownership of the app. If you wish you can switch. Of course that entails cost, effort, and time but you are free of Adobe. Furthermore, Adobe will get your message if enough of you do switch.
Aperture is cheap and Apple may be persuaded to pour some resources into it should they sense an opportunity. Of course Apple was the first mass implementer of the cloud business model so you may find no love there.


----------



## extremeinstability (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Thank god CS6 has the ability it has. They should have tried screwing everyone a while ago.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



jm977 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Buy a copy of CS6 and only pay for LR thru CC or if they continue to use retail copy's. you can convert your RAWs to DNGs later on to continue editing in CS6 for years.
> ...



No, you'd use the new LR6 to covert the 5d4 files to older style DNGs to process them.


----------



## dafrank (May 8, 2013)

*Shame on you Adobe*

I _am_ a professional. I _do_ treat all my business related purchases as business deductions, I own the Creative Suite Master Collection version CS6.0 and previously had Master Suite in version CS5.5 and CS5.0, and Design Premium in CS4, CS3, CS2 and the original CS, plus had Photoshop with multiple licences in almost every version before that going back to PS2.5, different versions of InDesign, Illustrator, Acrobat and several other pieces of miscellaneous Adobe products. In other words, for a very small business, probably the backbone of Adobe profitability, I am the very customer Adobe should want to please. I am not a troglodyte, I am all for new forms of service and product delivery when it makes sense and adds value to the customer and his business. I HATE THIS SUBSCRIPTION MODEL, WILL RESIST IT IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, SAW IT COMING A MILE AWAY, AND DO NOT VIEW THIS AS ANY SORT OF POSITIVE, NECESSARY OR INEVITABLE DEVELOPMENT FOR ADOBE'S CUSTOMERS.

The only value added by this is to Adobe's bottom line. I don't think profit is a dirty word. I don't begrudge Adobe their profit, and I would like to do whatever I can to raise my own business margins, but my experience has long proven to me that I can't do that by simply unilaterally raising prices, complicating the product delivery process, giving clients products that they didn't ask for, changing the terms of payment and asserting total control over what used to be up to the discretion of my clients. The profit that is best is that earned from pleasing your customers by offering great choices, not forcing them in an unequal power relationship, by offering your clients real product innovation and quality, real productivity gains, continuity of exceptional service, and just plain respect. Adobe has done none of this, but has unilaterally decided to try to impose a scheme to just force its customers into forking over more money, at their pleasure, on their schedule, for either no, or nearly no, added value to its customer base whatsoever.

Shame on you Adobe. This will not end well for you or your customers.

Regards,
David


----------



## FunPhotons (May 8, 2013)

They'll probably lose some amateurs at least. Under their old model I upgraded LR every year and PS every few years. Then they did the one time thing to PS6 which I missed out on, so I'm staying on PS5 (or 4?). Still works. But now with this I'm annoyed enough at LR that I'm ready to boot that too to find something faster. All I really care about is DNG, custom renaming on import and calibrations. Otherwise LR stinks - it's so slow I can't stand it sometimes. I wouldn't have bothered if it wasn't for this.


----------



## unfocused (May 8, 2013)

Here is a bit of irony. I went to the Adobe website today just to learn a bit more. I was surprised at all the applications available. Cool things that I might want to try. 

So, okay. If they had sent me an offer to voluntarily try out the Cloud at $20 a month, I probably would have felt like it was a real bargain and jumped at the chance, so long as I knew that I could go back to the old system if I found it wasn't worthwhile. But instead of enticing customers to try it out, they have completely mismanaged the whole thing by shoving it down customers throats. 

Interestingly, their own forum boards are filled with disgruntled customers and their big Adobe Max confab has now one big negative story coming out of it. As someone who has spent most of my working life helping people communicate with the public, I can only imagine the conversations that are going on in their PR department. This is exactly the sort of thing that happens when CEOS, Engineers and Accountants drive the agenda and don't listen to their communications people.


----------



## FunPhotons (May 8, 2013)

OK so I determined that either Image Mechanic will do what I want, or it is possible to do it with some hand built stuff. Who knows maybe I'll write a nice little software around it and sell it. 

Wouldn't have gone this far if Adobe hadn't pushed me. And this is the key, they're forcing customers to decide who is serious and who isn't, and I suspect they'll lose revenue from the not serious crowd.


----------



## rpt (May 8, 2013)

FunPhotons said:


> OK so I determined that either Image Mechanic will do what I want, or it is possible to do it with some hand built stuff. Who knows maybe I'll write a nice little software around it and sell it.
> 
> Wouldn't have gone this far if Adobe hadn't pushed me. And this is the key, they're forcing customers to decide who is serious and who isn't, and I suspect they'll lose revenue from the not serious crowd.


If you make, I am willing to QA. Seriously!

Edit: Windows only setup though... And I just have Windows XP and Windows 7. Don't plan to go to Windows 8 unless the XP dies *and* win8 has got to SP2...


----------



## RLPhoto (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



privatebydesign said:


> > "No, you'd use the new LR6 to covert the 5d4 files to older style DNGs to process them. "
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If you ever to decide not to pay the LR CC version, you'll still be able to process the ones you've down-converted to DNG. Plus, DNGs are a lot smaller than keeping 16 bit tiffs or 16 bit PSDs. 

Its a workaround I plan to use unless adobe smartened up a ditches this idea. Pay for LR CC and convert to DNG as needed and export 16 bit PSD for edits. Unless adobe updates the LR CC PSDs to only be openable by PS CC, then that's just cold.


----------



## cayenne (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



lilmsmaggie said:


> oh contraire mon ami - you had to download it from their server. That's the whole point of "Software as a Service." Either way you look at it, you will pay to play, stay with what you have or look for a more palatable alternative. Google will eventually move to the model for the Nik Collection. Most of their service offerings are already based on it.
> 
> And yes, software piracy does come into play in this game. Companies like Apple, Microsoft and Adobe that write software need to protect their revenues. Sure it won't stop piracy but it does allow the software companies to stay one step ahead of the pirates. Think about it: you ever download an evaluation or "trial version," of any software and have it stop working after the trial period expired.
> 
> ...


I think you're using the terms much different that what I understand them to be.
Buying software online, but a one time purchase and it is yours and does NOT have to be online to be used...is just buying software and downloading it onlne.

Software as a service is software that you never own, nor are licensed to used for as long as you like. YOu are 'renting' it literally in SAAS. The software phones home periodically to make sure you are still paying rent, and if you do not successfully connect for it to self verify, it ceases to work.

The NIK stuff, is not SAAS at this time. It 'could' be on some future edition I suppose, but any change Google makes to it going forward with new versions, will not affect my purchased suite I just got. My NIK purchase does not have to phone home to be renewed.

That's the difference between regular software (either downloaded or purchased on optical formats, etc) vs Software as a Service.

Just trying to get the terminology down. But just downloading software does not make is SAAS.

HTH,

cayenne


----------



## cayenne (May 8, 2013)

woollybear said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > xps said:
> ...



This model hasn't done gangbusters on every company that has tried it either.

Witness the dismal acceptance and sales of the new version of Sim City that recently came out. Lots of fanfare and anticipation, but once people saw that it had to always have an internet connection, for what was essentially a single player game...it was largely rejected and NOT a money maker.


----------



## cayenne (May 8, 2013)

FunPhotons said:


> OK so I determined that either Image Mechanic will do what I want, or it is possible to do it with some hand built stuff. Who knows maybe I'll write a nice little software around it and sell it.
> 
> Wouldn't have gone this far if Adobe hadn't pushed me. And this is the key, they're forcing customers to decide who is serious and who isn't, and I suspect they'll lose revenue from the not serious crowd.


I"m actually hopeful (ever the optimist)...that maybe this will drive more support and efforts to develop open source applications like PS. Maybe this will put money and effort to drive the GIMP. 

I know the GIMP is way behind PS, but it is pretty far along for an unsupported community effort. Look at applications like Blender which ARE quite well done. Maybe this will push GIMP further along. It has a great start, just needs more time and money put into it...?

That's my $0.02,

cayenne


----------



## deleteme (May 8, 2013)

So.... all the outrage will get everyone jumping ship to what?


Every upgrade cycle there is a chorus of complaint about the greedy so and so's at Adobe and how they are going to switch. Yet they never do because the alternatives are just not as good overall and we all know it. If there were credible competitors they would have real market share. There would be discussion groups that discuss something other than LR and PS. 

There are alternatives but they haven't stopped the Adobe party despite some apps being free.

Adobe has handled the transition poorly but at bottom they will hold on to a lot of users and in fact other software vendors may adopt the same policy by virtue of Adobe taking the flak for them. The predictions of their demise are premature.


----------



## wsmith96 (May 8, 2013)

Adobe is just following a trend. Stock prices perform well when you smooth out the quarterly revenues with subscription services. The people this won't affect are the professionals as they will pass that cost along to their clients. Amateurs and enthusiasts will have to make a choice, but understand that the other vendors will follow Adobe's lead. I know Corel is already entertaining this as well. 

the issue is what adobe will do when the honeymoon is over. After the subscriptions normalize, so will the stock price which means adobe will be pushed by investors to seek new ways to increase revenue. My concern is the same as expressed earlier - what happens if adobe decides that they will hold your work hostage. It wouldn't take much for them to push your files to an online only organizer where you could have access to your originals only, but have to pay to get to the edited versions. Have you seen adobe revel? This platform is well suited to do just that. If I were them, I would make the service free, but in some way painful like giving you a low storage amount, or only allowing x number if uploads a day. Then I would allow you to upgrade your service, etc. Oh, wait, they are already starting to do that. Again, the professionals will pass the costs along to their clients, but the people like me whom are becoming tired of being nickled and dimed will have a problem with this. What if adobe writes their license agreement to where you only have rights to your originals, but have joint or sole ownership of the edits - especially in exchange for a service for free. This is somewhat the model google uses. Would it piss you off to see one of your pictures used in an advertisement and you weren't paid a royalty or given credit? 

now this is some serious forward speculation here but it isn't that far fetched. The millennium babies are used to a rented life style and services for free in exchange for giving up intellectual ownership to the data they produce using these services. Companies today are positioning themselves to take advantage of that market. They make money by upselling you services, or by capitalizing on your intellectual property. interesting thing to watch will be the companies like Corel, serif, google, Microsoft, etc. Google and Microsoft are already kings in the cloud services market and they are in a position to actually steal some of Adobe's business away by offering "close enough to adobe" apps. Ever wonder why google bought nik software? Microsoft has photo software too though they aren't using much of it yet. The other lesser used software companies now have a shot at a level playing field as each company will scramble to provide the best service at the best price. Even though it is adobe we are discussing, every software company is on the ground floor when it comes to cloud services. By leveling the playing field, adobe is vulnerable to actually losing marketshare as this new generation of buyers is used to cheap/free and jumping between services for the better deal. What could happen is that adobe may end up with professional customers only, where as Corel and google provide you with free apps for any of your devices that can do the same thing. Guess how many professionals there are compared to hobbyists or ppl who think they are professionals. 

Do you really need adobe to do your photography work? Think about that before you answer.


----------



## Zlatko (May 8, 2013)

It's a big price increase, no matter how they spin it.

CC stands for Cash Cow, as someone said over on Facebook.


----------



## DFM (May 8, 2013)

Hobby Shooter said:


> DFM said:
> 
> 
> > The mandatory move to CC subscription licensing only affects products in the current "CS6" range. Bundled products without a CS6 badge (*including Lightroom* and Acrobat, plus all the "Elements" versions) will continue to be available under perpetual licenses as they are now.
> ...



Yes it's official info - I'm an ACP, we speak to the user community on behalf of Adobe but we're not sales reps.

Please read the CC FAQ at http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/faq.htm (it's being updated with new items regularly, including my two points above).

To touch on pricing, as Tom Hogarty said last week, Adobe are looking at how their product offers can best be tailored to suit photographers. That may mean in future there are 'pick-n-mix' bundles at different price points - but it's very early days. As I'm sure you appreciate, feedback is not something Adobe are short of this week 

The position on Lightroom is a little more complex than Photoshop, as Lr is a bundle product (it doesn't sync release dates with CS, this time it's a coincidence). All existing perpetual licenses for Lr4 and earlier will continue to work, perpetual licenses for Lr5 will go on sale when the public beta ends, and Lr5 will be rolled out to existing Creative Cloud and new CC subscribers just as Lr4 was. The only significant difference is that boxed copies are not available - All Adobe software is download-only as of this month, so you buy a serial number (from Adobe's store or through the normal retail networks like Amazon) and download the installer from Adobe's CDN. Of course you can burn it to disc as a backup if you want.

In future there may well be times when new features appear in the CC-bundled version of Lr which aren't yet in the perpetual version, because Cloud subscribers get new features quicker (as SOX doesn't apply).

The questions about Web connectivity seem to have been resolved; to summarize - CC normally pings the activation server once every 30 days. If you don't have connectivity it will run a grace period of another 30 days, then revert to trial mode (which then runs for 30 days) - this gives 99 full days of work before the apps refuse to open. Customers have been asking about how to install CC on firewalled machines or how to work for more than 99 days in remote locations, there will be clarification on that shortly.


----------



## eml58 (May 8, 2013)

DFM said:


> Hobby Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > DFM said:
> ...



Nice of you to clarify, appreciated.

Issue exist within the way in which Adobe have handled this, from small to huge, the support has been virtually non extent here in Singapore, if there was an alternative I'de be knocking on their doors, which I'm sure wouldn't worry Adobe in the least.

I'm in fact one of the few on this Thread that thinks the Creative Cloud/App system works just fine, Apple have it down reasonably pat, Adobe's Creative Cloud attempt to Market has been an unmitigated disaster.

The 30 day re ping thing is total BS in my opinion, Adobe like so many other Companies in the "Digital Age" simply think that everyone on the Planet is connected to the Internet 24/7, that's just not the case, I may not be away from an Internet connection for 90 days, but I certainly have 45 to 60 days at times if I'm travelling in places like Antarctica, The Arctic, Africa, to have a situation where you need to be pinged every 30 days is nonsense, I have to assume this is based on the Monthly Billing, which I also think is ludicrous, there seems no option for an annual payment system unless you go to the "Business" oriented packages.

Adobe will loose custom, there isn't any doubt in my view, they may not loose the serious Amateurs or the Business involvement, but I cant see the individuals that take up CS4 for instance, then sit on the package for 4 years relying on updates to the CS4 package, liking this "annualised" hit to the pocket.

And has been said, it may be that the "system" Adobe has taken on will over time become more user friendly, but the support side is a total crock of you know what, if you want support in Asia, you get a Phone Number that's answered in Mumbai by people that hardly know what day of the week it is, numerous calls to these Guys has just ensured that my personal view of Adobe support goes from Ho Hum to downright hopeless.

But I'm sure Adobe will continue to prosper because again as has been said, at the moment, really what else is out there does what CS6 Suite does, Aperture ?? Not even close, and most of the other suggestions on this thread don't either.

I could live with the whole deal if Adobe would just get their support side to lift their heads out of their collective dark place.


----------



## RGF (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



RLPhoto said:


> Buy a copy of CS6 and only pay for LR thru CC or if they continue to use retail copy's. you can convert your RAWs to DNGs later on to continue editing in CS6 for years.
> 
> That's my plan anyway.



No upgrades, no new features, ... imagine being stuck on CS(1) or earlier. Would you be happy?


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (May 8, 2013)

Adobe kinda just leveled the playing field a bit. Now everyone feels the need to stop at CS6. Meanwhile, Apple, Microsoft, Google, and anyone else who feels the need to gain some market share from Adobe's goof can gain speed right before we decide to upgrade.

Adobe's right, they should abandon the disc. I think the Creative Cloud belongs on a 4 inch "floppy".

Cheers,
-Tabor


----------



## Hobby Shooter (May 8, 2013)

DFM said:


> Hobby Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > DFM said:
> ...


Thanks for clarifying, I realized I came out as a bit rude in my comment, I didn't mean to. I was on the run and sometimes people on this forum make claims without any insight whatsoever. 

About the difference in update intervals between subscribed and perpetual, it completely makes sense. You get what you pay for and it makes more sense to implement changes to the online versions more often.

thanks
J


----------



## sandymandy (May 8, 2013)

Im a bit confused. Does it mean i cant buy lightroom for myself (private use) anymore but only get some kind of lightroom subscription?


----------



## lilmsmaggie (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

It's possible but I think we talking the same language. You might say I'm going beyond the literal definition to: "How many ways can I expand this distribution/pricing model?"

What do you call a distribution/delivery mechanism to acquire software only by download -- no media is made available. Where you the consumer can acquire software or other services 24/7 - on demand and on-line over the web. 

I said nothing of requiring you to be tethered via an on-line connection to be able to "use the product"; however, for a fee, there are additional services available to you as a customer should you choose to "store" or retrieve your data, take advantage of other features etc. etc. For that - well, if you want access to it ...

You have to look at each component that makes up the SaaS model. At its core, a SaaS is a software distribution model. Whether you buy it or pay a subscription fee (pricing model), the premise of the distribution model remains constant. Oh BTW --you have to establish an on-line connection when you click on that: "Check for Updates ..." 

If it sounds like a duck; Walks like a duck and looks like a duck. Its a duck.

That recent $129 - $149 Google Nik Collection offer -- that was honey for the bees. Like any other company, Google exists to make a profit. 

Let's do what Adobe is doing -- wait 6 - 12 mos. and see how their new model plays out in the marketplace.

I'm done here.







cayenne said:


> lilmsmaggie said:
> 
> 
> > oh contraire mon ami - you had to download it from their server. That's the whole point of "Software as a Service." Either way you look at it, you will pay to play, stay with what you have or look for a more palatable alternative. Google will eventually move to the model for the Nik Collection. Most of their service offerings are already based on it.
> ...


----------



## sylvestrerato (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Hi,

Here's what Adobe says: "The desktop applications do not live in the cloud. You install them like you've always installed them. That said, they need to connect to the internet once a month to verify your membership."

I conclude that there's actually no change between CS and CC since the programs in CS already connect to Adobe's server to check various things and send information. That means piracy cannot be a reason behind Adobe move.


----------



## DFM (May 8, 2013)

sandymandy said:


> Im a bit confused. Does it mean i cant buy lightroom for myself (private use) anymore but only get some kind of lightroom subscription?



You can absolutely buy Lightroom for yourself, as a retail copy with no subscription, just as before. You can _also_ get it on subscription.

The only products which are becoming subscription-only are the ones with 'CC' in their name, as listed here: http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/tools-and-services.html


----------



## DFM (May 8, 2013)

eml58 said:


> The 30 day re ping thing is total BS in my opinion, Adobe like so many other Companies in the "Digital Age" simply think that everyone on the Planet is connected to the Internet 24/7, that's just not the case, I may not be away from an Internet connection for 90 days, but I certainly have 45 to 60 days at times if I'm travelling in places like Antarctica, The Arctic, Africa, to have a situation where you need to be pinged every 30 days is nonsense, I have to assume this is based on the Monthly Billing, which I also think is ludicrous, there seems no option for an annual payment system unless you go to the "Business" oriented packages.
> 
> And has been said, it may be that the "system" Adobe has taken on will over time become more user friendly, but the support side is a total crock of you know what, if you want support in Asia, you get a Phone Number that's answered in Mumbai by people that hardly know what day of the week it is, numerous calls to these Guys has just ensured that my personal view of Adobe support goes from Ho Hum to downright hopeless.



If you're offline for between 30 and 60 days, your installed products will continue to work just fine - you will see a 'cannot connect' message after day 30 with a 30-day countdown timer, just dismiss it and carry on working. I know it doesn't help people who are literally in the middle of nowhere, but a 'ping' is only a few tens of bytes; and only one app from the installed collection needs to make the connection. As I said, Adobe are looking at options to help users who are routinely off-grid for months at a time, so there may be a 'pre-book' system introduced.

The Adobe store sells monthly and annual plans to personal customers, but both are actually billed on a month-by-month basis to your credit card. Retailers will be able to sell CC subscriptions in pre-pay blocks, so you can buy a full year in one transaction through them. I expect we'll see some competitive pricing in the retail sector.

As to the performance of Customer Support, I completely understand. It should be better, and we continually advocate on your behalf to improve the service. If you have account-related questions (billing, lost serial numbers, etc.) you have to go through CS as only they have visibility on your financials, but for technical stuff I strongly suggest posting in the community forum ( http://forums.adobe.com ) - we have folks in there who know vastly more than the agents in CS, and we're free!


----------



## tomscott (May 8, 2013)

I think most people on here are getting carried away and running with the sheep...

I think CC is a great idea the amount of applications from the suite you get the value per app is quite high. Like I said earlier the Full CS6 Suite is £2,500 and you can have that for £600py and 45% less if you are upgrading. Seen as tho the CS suites have had a 18month life span in theory its cheaper... and there are a lot of new aps you may not have heard of which are brilliant. Like Muse and Edge.

The suite has 38 different apps and add ons. for £48 a month to start that is 80p per application. In my business we use all of them.

If you are just a photographer and not in multimedia which I find hard to believe, then a version of photoshop is £17 a month which I also see as good value, compared to spending the full outlay on PS Extended which is £649, then a new version will be out in 18 months with an upgrade path of 50% off so thats £900 for one programme. or £204 a year for PS CC.

TBH I feel most of the people who are complaining are not current subscribers to CS anyway and get it some how under the rug... For a pro it is bread and butter and it pays for itself, its a small price to pay.

For the people who apparently bought every CS suite, what did you do with it after you upgraded? I bet you didn't sell it, I bet its still sitting on a shelf.

Its like getting a car on PP you pay for the usage then dont have to worry about residuals and depreciation because the package is better value for people who USE it.

The IF statement whether you quit and then you have nothing for your money, well as a pro why would you quit? If you are a current customer they are giving good upgrade paths... There is NOTHING on the market even close and it is an industry standard! All agencies, newspapers etc use it. The CS suite has been in development for 20 years. I don't see anything coming to market at the same scale and quality any time soon.

PS is a pro application with pro prices... people seem to forget that, its not the go to app for any old john doe, it never has been its just been made available by piracy.


----------



## agierke (May 8, 2013)

> I'm contemplating Capture One for the bulk of my post-processing with Lightroom (with Nik tools) as a backup until Adobe stops supporting its user base too. I have been a Photoshop user for 18 years.



i was thinking the exact same thing. i have been wanting to get more familiar with Capture One anyway as i hear it has a stellar processor.


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (May 8, 2013)

tomscott said:


> I think most people on here are getting carried awouay and running with the sheep...
> 
> ...and those who aren't running are getting picked off by wolves. The money mongers at Adobe are baaaaaaaaaaaaad.
> 
> ...


----------



## Maui5150 (May 8, 2013)

Dong believe the BS on how often Adobe will Ping the network from your PC as well as don't believe that they don't track and gather a TON of your personal data.

I run Eset at home for my Virus/FW and have it set to exclusively disallow and every app has to request access. It can be a slow process at first with the pop-up constantly coming up, but the HUGE advantage, you really get an idea of what your software does and how often it "Calls Home" to the mother base.

So of it is of course the "Is there an upgrade" check, but with Adobe products, especially Flash, you would be surprised how you go to certain websites and all of a sudden Flash is asking permission to talk to Adobe. 

And to Tomscott - you are an idiot and many of us don't appreciate you assertion that we are pirates.

Most people here may not be subscribers to CS, but I would assert that most people here ARE Owners of Photoshop. Hell. I think I finally tossed out some of my Photoshop 3 discs the other day... Not CS 3, but Photoshop 3.

For myself, I am not a Creative Suite 6 owner. I am a Creative Suite 5 owner, as well as a Photoshop CS 6 owner... I really had no need to upgrade the other tools, and hell, I was was a Cold Fusion, Cold Fusion Studio user back when they were MacroMedia Products.

Long story short, I like to OWN my software and decide what I need to use on a regular basis and what I need to use on an occasional basis. I see the big scam going on, which may be beneficial for a small subset of users, or users who were foolish with their money and bought suites that they really did not need, but don't diminish the specialized user whose average cost for a product like Photoshop is below $100 a year. Some of us time sales, watch for holiday sales and the like, and whether my 5 year cost is $400 or as high as $550, it has been pretty consistent in terms of cost.

For the Photoshop user, the cost is $20/month. I know there has been mention that it will be as low as $10, but I have been all over the Adobe site and single app on Photoshop is $20/mo. That is $240 a year, or my cost 5 years from now is 1200. That is a 60% increase.

What pisses off users, and something you don't grasp - is not all users want to upgrade all the time. Some of us decide that Photoshop CS 5 might have been worth the upgrade, CS 5.5 not so much, and CS 6, yeah, go for it... So lets say CS7 is worth while, but CS8 only runs on Windows 2015... and a user does not want yo upgrade. They are F%^*(ked in the CC because they are paying monthly for an upgrade they don't or CAN'T USE. 

I know people who still run LightRoom 3.6. Why

Gee, they are on XP and don't need or want to upgrade to Win 7. Yup... Not all the bang and whistles of LR 4, and yes, LightRoom 4 was a nice step up, but as someone who has been in IT for 25 years and on the Internet for 20 (I originally used NCSA Mosaic and still have a Beta .93 version of Netscape lying around) I have seen a lot of hardware. 

And by the way, your comment:
_*
"The CS suite has been in development for 20 years. I don't see anything coming to market at the same scale and quality any time soon."*_

Really? That platform back then was Windows for Workgroups 3.11 if you were lucky. If you wanted to get on the Internet, you used a dial-up modem for the most part, and if you were lucky you had a smoking 2400 baud model. I still have one floating around. and man, when you got up to 9600 or even 14.4 or 19.2... you were smoking.

Back then we created two versions of websites, one that handled graphics like backgrounds, and some of us even remember the dreaded "blink" tag, and those that were text only for browsers like Lynx. 

Adobe Photoshop CS came out in 2003. Some of us remember it because we had of say, Photoshop 3, Photoshop 4, 5, 5.5, 6 and 7 before the CS line of software came out.

So please... Enlighten me... How has Creative Suite been in development for 20 years, when CS was first released in 2003???? 

And sorry... as someone who HAS been using Photoshop for 20 years, I don't like the idea of "Renting" the software going forward, especially since I have a lot of Adobe products I have seen little need to upgrade, and prefer a model where I OWN what I buy and have freedom to use it as long as you want.


----------



## FunPhotons (May 8, 2013)

tomscott said:


> I think most people on here are getting carried away and running with the sheep...
> 
> .. blah blah ..
> 
> PS is a pro application with pro prices... people seem to forget that, its not the go to app for any old john doe, it never has been its just been made available by piracy.



The definitions are meaningless, all that matters here is a company that has a business model and consumers that vote with their dollars. As I said earlier I'm the type of user that upgrades every other year, or every third year. Works fine for me with my usage, and Adobe got a nice little revenue stream from that. Then they went to a model where you have to upgrade every year. OK I stopped upgrading and considered next steps as they don't support my use case anymore. Now they even disallow using legacy software, you have to pay for use. 

Fine, whatever, their call. Note that the only reason for doing this however is their own convienance in not having to maintain two code bases. It's certainly not a customer request because those who need CC had it, and those who didn't, don't. This will cut off the occasional users like me and open the door for competition. Might be a good strategy or might not. 

I should mention, the point about piracy is also meaningless. I work on the other end of that which is preventing software piracy, and I can say that adding Cloud support doesn't magically make it harder to pirate.


----------



## cayenne (May 8, 2013)

DFM said:


> Hobby Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > DFM said:
> ...



So, if I read your quoted part correctly...

I could join CC paid....download the archived version (current version?) of CS6, which would run stand alone, not requiring CC account, and then quit and still have CS6 which would run indefinitely?

If so, that sounds like a bit of a bargain...?

cayenne


----------



## FunPhotons (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

May have been mentioned already but Acorn for OS X might be adequate for photographers

http://www.flyingmeat.com/acorn/


----------



## unfocused (May 8, 2013)

cayenne said:


> So, if I read your quoted part correctly...
> 
> I could join CC paid....download the archived version (current version?) of CS6, which would run stand alone, not requiring CC account, and then quit and still have CS6 which would run indefinitely?
> 
> ...



Umm...Not quite. From the Adobe website: _If you purchased an annual individual membership plan and you cancel after the first 30 days but before meeting the 12-month commitment date, you will be charged 50% of the remaining amount left on your contract._

I suppose that would still be cheaper, but not as much of a bargain as you may be thinking.

Now, to respond to some of the recent comments:

I have always been a legal user of Adobe products. To suggest that the complaints that are showing up all across the Internet are primarily from people who purchased the software is ridiculous. As others have pointed out, those who buy pirated software aren't going to be deterred by this. They aren't the ones who complain. It is those of us who play by the rules.

Reminds me of the gun control argument – criminals steal guns and use them illegally, so let's make it hard for persons to own guns legally.

To the statement that Adobe products are professional and you shouldn't be using them if you can't afford to pay whatever they want to charge. Well, I suppose that is their right, but, like Canon, Adobe could not survive on their professional users alone. It is the extensive base of non-professionals who provide the financial support for the company. Photoshop, in particular, has long been marketed to amateurs and hobbyists. 

And, even for professionals, I don't know of too many business people who can just arbitrarily pass on every increased cost to their customers. Especially photographers, who are increasingly battling one another for a shrinking pie. 

As for the claim that these products have been in development for decades. So what? Also, let's remember that Adobe didn't get to where they are by innovation alone. A large part of their success has come from swallowing up other companies like Aldus and Macromedia.

But, in the end, what I keep coming back to is this: If this is such a great deal for the customer, why is it mandatory?


----------



## RLPhoto (May 8, 2013)

Adobe CC is equal to a Mercedes dealer only allowing leases. It seems like a deal but your pouring money into something you don't own. If adobe cannot make enough money with the hundreds of thousands of purchases of CS6, they need to blame management for the poor handling of funds.

It's Mercedes saying, "there is too many people stealing our cars, so now we only offer leases to customers."

??? What?


----------



## RLPhoto (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



RGF said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Buy a copy of CS6 and only pay for LR thru CC or if they continue to use retail copy's. you can convert your RAWs to DNGs later on to continue editing in CS6 for years.
> ...



You talking to someone who's be using CS3 extended, and found little need to upgrade until now. 

That's six years, now imagine if I had to pay 6 years of CC. That's a rip off.


----------



## awinphoto (May 8, 2013)

cayenne said:


> DFM said:
> 
> 
> > Hobby Shooter said:
> ...



Nope... with your account, they issue a license code, much like any current adobe product... you cancel your account, the code is canceled, and any further access is canceled without that code being active... so otherwise it wont work beyond that point.


----------



## Maui5150 (May 8, 2013)

cayenne said:


> So, if I read your quoted part correctly...
> 
> I could join CC paid....download the archived version (current version?) of CS6, which would run stand alone, not requiring CC account, and then quit and still have CS6 which would run indefinitely?
> 
> ...



My understanding is that SOME of the archive software will be available, not all, and since you are not really getting a serial number, your account is maintained through your USER PROFILE. So when you go through the Adope Cash Cow, the software you download is designed to "call the mother ship" every month and check if you have paid your bill. You cancel, it may run for a month, but eventually it will fail,.

I can envision hackers doing cracks that either intercept the calls, or remove this from the software, and all and all it just makes upgrading more of a pain.


----------



## cayenne (May 8, 2013)

awinphoto said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > So, if I read your quoted part correctly...
> ...



But wait, current CS6 doesn't phone home, right?
I was assuming that the 'archived' old versions they spoke about, would be stand alone CS6...
So, it sounds to me like you subscribe for a year, you can get the CC for a year, *BUT* you can also download CS6 (maybe the Production suite?), and have that as a stand alone download.

So, you have that, complete your year CC, and still have CS6 standalone you downloaded, which doesn't phone home...that you can use to your hearts desire?

Of course, they haven't said which legacy apps they'll have for this, but it sounds to me like you can get the old non-phone home versions of things you can download and use, they'll be unsupported, but if you got the CS6 Suite for the year of CC price, at the end of the year, you could quite and end up with CS6 suite for less than what it costs now?

cayenne


----------



## thepancakeman (May 8, 2013)

tomscott said:


> If you are just a photographer and not in multimedia which I find hard to believe,



I think that about sums up the depth of your perception capabilities which puts the rest of the post in an appropriate context.



tomscott said:


> TBH I feel most of the people who are complaining are not current subscribers to CS anyway and get it some how under the rug... For a pro it is bread and butter and it pays for itself, its a small price to pay.



Right, so all the professionals are using warez versions of software.




tomscott said:


> Its like getting a car on PP you pay for the usage then dont have to worry about residuals and depreciation because the package is better value for people who USE it.



Yup, some people lease cars and it makes sense. But know what? Lots of people still prefer to purchase and own cars even with all that evil depreciation, etc.



tomscott said:


> The IF statement whether you quit and then you have nothing for your money, well as a pro why would you quit?



You're right, people never change jobs or retire but want to still enjoy their hobby or use it as a part time income. C'mon folks, either you're all in or you're out! </sarcasm>




tomscott said:


> The CS suite has been in development for 20 years. I don't see anything coming to market at the same scale and quality any time soon.



Others have adequately addressed this piece of ridiculousness.



tomscott said:


> PS is a pro application with pro prices... people seem to forget that, its not the go to app for any old john doe, it never has been its just been made available by piracy.



So it's okay for amateurs to own $3500 (or even $7000) cameras, but a $600 software package is only for pros and us non-pros clearly can't afford it and must pirate it? You really have some strange views of the world my friend.


----------



## awinphoto (May 8, 2013)

cayenne said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > cayenne said:
> ...



It depends... At my home computer I have CS5 stand alone... at my work office I have CS6, but that is through the CC... That is controlled through the adobe device manager... the device manager does the phone home stuff... So yeah... If we were to stop paying the CC i'm fairly sure eventually I would lose CS6


----------



## RGF (May 8, 2013)

It will be interesting to see how adobe develops PSE. if PSE is really an photographer's version of PS,perhaps PSE & LR will be a solution


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 8, 2013)

DFM said:


> In future there may well be times when new features appear in the CC-bundled version of Lr which aren't yet in the perpetual version, because Cloud subscribers get new features quicker (as SOX doesn't apply).



So how is that you say you can't continue CC and perpetual versions of programs because the code maintenance is too tricky but now you are actually splitting LR into CC and perpetual?


----------



## dswatson83 (May 8, 2013)

*The biggest problem with Adobe Creative Cloud*

There are many things to be liked about Adobe creative cloud. But one thing I hate is that there is no exit at all. If for some reason you decide you can't justify $50/month or if Adobe raises prices later, once you stop paying adobe, you can't even open your files it seems! The is freaking horrible if true. There is a more detailed analysis at http://learningcameras.com/tips/5-all/142-adobe-creative-cloud-the-future-is-now-the-present
We will see if Adobe responds but right it doesn't look good. Although now that they have basically canceled the stand alone seats, what choice do we have. We are all going to be moving to the cloud out of lack of options but Adobe will likely see the influx as positive reinforcement and will change nothing. Adobe needs to come out with a free reader program like the article says or else I don't know how I can keep using it.


----------



## vtechproductions (May 8, 2013)

*Re: The biggest problem with Adobe Creative Cloud*

Yeah, I can't stand what Adobe is doing here. They better figure an alternative or there is no way I'm updating. Anyone know any good alternatives to premiere or Photoshop? I don't use Apple computers so their software will not work for me. Lightroom is still available on it's own...at least for now


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 8, 2013)

*Re: The biggest problem with Adobe Creative Cloud*

You can always save edits in a tiff or DNG format for stills, but you may lose the ability to re-edit later. I don't save files as PSD very often, so my edited files become tiff files which can be read anywhere.

They are not moving Lightroom to the cc, so for now, my lightroom edits are safe. I have not been saving them all to jpeg, and probably won't. If I need a old image, I can always re-edit the cr2 file 10 years from now using whatever software I have.

Video will be the same issue, both the source and output files are safe. Its a question of re-editing.

I think I'll avoid using DNG, since its obvious that Adobe might take it away whenever they think they can make money by holding images hostage.


----------



## 7enderbender (May 8, 2013)

Alright then. This is the final straw with the morons that have already a bunch of other products that were really good before Adobe got their hands on them.

I'll keep using LR3 and CS5 until I make a switch to Apple products by the end of the year and then that's it for Adobe products. They can shove it. And please nobody tell me what an excellent deal I'm missing out on or how this "pays for itself" for a professional/semi-professional. It's too expensive and it's stupid. I don't want a new and "improved" version all the time anyway. I've yet to see a reason to "upgrade" to CS6 or LR4 let alone sign up for a subscription or cloud service. Screw this.

Let's hope this gives a boost to competitors.


----------



## 7enderbender (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



Click said:


> Good post. I will follow this thread closely.



+1


----------



## hsbn (May 8, 2013)

*Re: The biggest problem with Adobe Creative Cloud*



dswatson83 said:


> once you stop paying adobe, you can't even open your files it seems!


It's not that they lock your file or anything. Once you stop paying, your software will no longer work, just the software not the file. For example, if you work in PS and save your file as TIFF and cancel the subscription, you can use other program to open your TIFF file. So you can convert all your PSD files to TIFF before cancelling. That's why Adobe doesn't have to make any "READER" program. What's the point of making PSD reader when you can view it but cannot edit anything. Then may as well convert them to TIFF, save the trouble. Also TIFF can store layers too.


----------



## RGF (May 8, 2013)

*Re: The biggest problem with Adobe Creative Cloud*

For me, the biggest problem with this is the price. I use only LR and PS, options are $50/month or $20/month for PS and buy LR as package software (roughly $80 every 12-18 months). That is if they keep LR at $80 per upgrade.

I understand the reasons and can live with going to CC (though I hate the idea) but would like (1) lower price for PS & LR combo - say $15/month and (2) since I already have licenses the right to stop updates for a defined period (say 12 months) but keep using the software.


----------



## unfocused (May 8, 2013)

*Re: The biggest problem with Adobe Creative Cloud*

If you've read any of my posts over the past few days, you know how unhappy I am with this move. But, I don't really think it's fair to say there is no exit strategy.

Adobe says they will make CS6 available for download indefinitely. So, if you drop the system after a year, you can still use Photoshop CS6 to open and edit your files. Now, will CS6 be able to open files 5 or 6 years from now? That's another question. But, that has always been a problem with virtually every program that exists today. There are no universal standards and no guarantees that today's formats will be accessible tomorrow. If you've ever stored anything on a floppy disk, you know the problem.


----------



## ksagomonyants (May 8, 2013)

*Re: The biggest problem with Adobe Creative Cloud*

I have CS5.5 Master Collection, so I don't plan to upgrade. However, for many people it may be a big problem that CC isn't available for every country (especially, if you're buying the individual license).

http://www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/creativecloud/cc/pdfs/cc-availability-matrix.pdf


----------



## ksagomonyants (May 8, 2013)

Many companies start switching to subscription-based license instead of a perpetual license (MS Office, GraphPad Prism, SPSS, etc). For those who cannot pay >$1000 to buy a software, $20-30 may not be a bad alternative, especially during times when economy is so bad. 

I'm sorry but I don't really get many of you guys. Lightroom stays as a standalone application. For some reasons, many amateurs think they have to have Photoshop (and it has to be the latest version, of course) to do their photo editing. Old version of Photoshop/Photoshop Elements/Lightroom may be more than enough for a lot of us. I personally have Master Collection CS5.5 which I got at a discount when I was a student and I'll use it until I upgrade to an unsupported camera or new OS.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 8, 2013)

ksagomonyants said:


> Many companies start switching to subscription-based license instead of a perpetual license (MS Office, GraphPad Prism, SPSS, etc). For those who cannot pay >$1000 to buy a software, $20-30 may not be a bad alternative, especially during times when economy is so bad.
> 
> I'm sorry but I don't really get many of you guys. Lightroom stays as a standalone application. For some reasons, many amateurs think they have to have Photoshop (and it has to be the latest version, of course) to do their photo editing. Old version of Photoshop/Photoshop Elements/Lightroom may be more than enough for a lot of us. I personally have Master Collection CS5.5 which I got at a discount when I was a student and I'll use it until I upgrade to an unsupported camera or new OS.



It because your paying the same amount or more money to adobe and in return you don't own anything. Where you used to pay said money and your set with whatever version of CS you wanted. 

In a way, it ties you to payments for years because even retired designers still need to open PSDs occasionally and they will now have to pay that fee just to do that, for years.


----------



## ksagomonyants (May 8, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> ksagomonyants said:
> 
> 
> > Many companies start switching to subscription-based license instead of a perpetual license (MS Office, GraphPad Prism, SPSS, etc). For those who cannot pay >$1000 to buy a software, $20-30 may not be a bad alternative, especially during times when economy is so bad.
> ...



I totally agree with you, that's why I said I'm not planning to upgrade from CS5.5 But Adobe doesn't force you to upgrade and there're various alternatives to Photoshop too. Maybe they aren't as functional but for amateurs it's much more than enough. But for professionals, $30-50/month isn't that bad either, but I'm not a professional.


----------



## Canon 14-24 (May 8, 2013)

ksagomonyants said:


> I'm sorry but I don't really get many of you guys. Lightroom stays as a standalone application. For some reasons, many amateurs think they have to have Photoshop (and it has to be the latest version, of course) to do their photo editing. Old version of Photoshop/Photoshop Elements/Lightroom may be more than enough for a lot of us. I personally have Master Collection CS5.5 which I got at a discount when I was a student and I'll use it until I upgrade to an unsupported camera or new OS.



I have to have the latest photoshop CS6 just to open my damn 5d3 raw files. That was the only reason I upgraded from CS4 and the only reason I upgraded to CS4 from CS2 was to open the damn raw files for the 5D2!


----------



## Zlatko (May 8, 2013)

tomscott said:


> If you are just a photographer and not in multimedia which I find hard to believe, then a version of photoshop is £17 a month which I also see as good value, compared to spending the full outlay on PS Extended which is £649, then a new version will be out in 18 months with an upgrade path of 50% off so thats £900 for one programme. or £204 a year for PS CC.
> 
> TBH I feel most of the people who are complaining are not current subscribers to CS anyway and get it some how under the rug...



A price increase is a price increase, no matter how you spin it. And for most photographers it is a hefty price increase. 

After the initial investment, Photoshop was $11.11/mo. if you bought *every* update ($200/18 mos.) or $5.55/mo. if you skipped a version and bought every other update. Now Adobe wants $19.99/mo., every month, for the rest of your working life. For many photographers this nearly *doubles*, or more than *triples*, the long term cost. How is that "a good value"? ???

And yes I am talking about photographers who buy it legally. Your "feeling" that most of the people who are complaining "get it some how under the rug" is just plain wrong. Most people who are complaining recognize a big price increase when they see it. You just have to do the math to see what's happening.


----------



## ksagomonyants (May 8, 2013)

Canon 14-24 said:


> ksagomonyants said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry but I don't really get many of you guys. Lightroom stays as a standalone application. For some reasons, many amateurs think they have to have Photoshop (and it has to be the latest version, of course) to do their photo editing. Old version of Photoshop/Photoshop Elements/Lightroom may be more than enough for a lot of us. I personally have Master Collection CS5.5 which I got at a discount when I was a student and I'll use it until I upgrade to an unsupported camera or new OS.
> ...



Again, I'm totally agree with you and I understand your frustration. But that means you can use your CS6 for at least 3-4 more years. I'm sure during this time some other companies will develop software similar to Photoshop in terms of its functionality. It may well be possible that Adobe itself will change its marketing strategy if it starts losing a lot of its customers. 

P.S. I myself got mad at GraphPad when they switched their perpetual license for students to monthly-based license some time ago. So, in 2 years you spend the same amount of money as if you bought it at the beginning, meaning you have no money and no software if you decide to stop paying.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 9, 2013)

*Customers to stop buying Adobe software*

title says it all

people do not want to rent bits


----------



## pdirestajr (May 9, 2013)

*Re: Customers to stop buying Adobe software*

I'll bite.
I'm fine with paying a subscription fee. It's a write-off. It's only 19.99 for everything if you upgraded to CS6 (which I did).

I also have no doubt when it is close to my year being up, they will try really hard to get me to renew with "deals" like, "Renew by date x to get your next year for 19.99! Wow! What an amazing savings! But wait, order within the next 10 minutes and we will throw in this FREE gift with purchase!!!"

But I am a professional designer and will use every program.

Pure photogs can get away with just using Lightroom.


----------



## RGF (May 9, 2013)

Zlatko said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > If you are just a photographer and not in multimedia which I find hard to believe, then a version of photoshop is £17 a month which I also see as good value, compared to spending the full outlay on PS Extended which is £649, then a new version will be out in 18 months with an upgrade path of 50% off so thats £900 for one programme. or £204 a year for PS CC.
> ...



I am complaining and I am legal. Price is too high - plus I can get upgrades for less with NAPP,discount. Also I paid for Photoshop original. If I had not, then $20/month would be a good deal.

$15/month for both PS& LR fixed for a 5 yrs


----------



## CanonGirl (May 9, 2013)

I notice that some are calling $20/month a good deal, so for those who use Photoshop Extended and upgrade every two years, here's the price comparision over 10 years for the old purchase upgrade option vs the new CC option:

Old (List) = $2595; CC = $2400. So, basically, Adobe is making users pay nearly full retail, as compared to the old model over 10 years, for those just needing Photoshop. Adobe is really trying to push customers into the complete package by not offerring a meaningful deal for the single-package option, but they are offering a reasonable deal for the entire package. If one performs the same calculation for, say, 20 years, then Adobe has slightly increased the price of their single-package option, compared to the old model (Old List = $4590; CC = $4800). Obviously, if you're one who only upgrades every other version, then CC is a big increase in cost.


----------



## cayenne (May 9, 2013)

awinphoto said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > awinphoto said:
> ...



Ok...my assumption was that the 'archived' version of CS6 Production Suite, if that is one that is offered, would be the same as the one you can purchase today without any need for a cloud connection.

If that is the case, then it would be worthwhile to pay for CC for one year, download the standalone CS6 Suite (if offered as one of the archived versions that the Adobe Rep on here mentioned), and then quit CC after the first year and just use the stand alone 'archive', unsupported older CS6 Suite/Tools till either something better comes along, or Adobe has a moment of clarity and switches back to versions you can buy and not have to *rent*.

Anyway, it might be interesting to see what exactly these "Archived Downloadable Older versions" might end up being....and see if my thought process is proved to be true.

C


----------



## deleteme (May 9, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



neuroanatomist said:


> The rant thread about Adobe's new subscription model is 6 pages long and growing fast. The thread about alternatives is a mere four posts long, only one of which actually names any software. Makes it pretty clear that no matter how much ranting there is, Adobe can do what they like.



+1
Many have spoken boldly about switching but I have yet to see a SW list that is credible.
The alternatives I would guess at are:

Capture One or Aperture to replace LR (though I understand one will still be able to buy boxed versions of this indefinitely)

And maybe Paintshop Pro to replace PS? The Gimp is also suggested but again I hear very few reports from actual users.
Of course there is always Snapseed and Picasa.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 9, 2013)

ksagomonyants said:


> Many companies start switching to subscription-based license instead of a perpetual license (MS Office, GraphPad Prism, SPSS, etc). For those who cannot pay >$1000 to buy a software, $20-30 may not be a bad alternative, especially during times when economy is so bad.
> 
> I'm sorry but I don't really get many of you guys. Lightroom stays as a standalone application. For some reasons, many amateurs think they have to have Photoshop (and it has to be the latest version, of course) to do their photo editing. Old version of Photoshop/Photoshop Elements/Lightroom may be more than enough for a lot of us. I personally have Master Collection CS5.5 which I got at a discount when I was a student and I'll use it until I upgrade to an unsupported camera or new OS.



Lightroom can't do plenty of things and Elements has a few very key cripples. And don't forget these are video DSLRs these days so what about Premiere Pro?

Also they already have now said that LR CC may end up with more advanced features as time goes on. I.E. they are PS CS6ing LR5 too most likely. (they are at least adding new camera support to both, at least for the time being, which is good)


----------



## dgatwood (May 9, 2013)

*Re: The biggest problem with Adobe Creative Cloud*



hsbn said:


> dswatson83 said:
> 
> 
> > once you stop paying adobe, you can't even open your files it seems!
> ...



If what you do with Photoshop can be accurately stored in a TIFF, you don't need Photoshop. The problem with Photoshop files is that nothing else can fully handle its file format—layer effects, per-character text size/tracking, per-line leading, 16 bits per channel, layer masks, CMYK, etc., and those are just the *CS3* features that cause problems for other apps. Heaven help you if you use any of the features that Adobe has added since then, like the ability to paint on 3D objects (CS5 and later, IIRC).

So yes, you can export to a TIFF file, but if you're a serious Photoshop user, you are likely to lose a *lot*, and the resulting TIFF file won't be anything you would ever consider editing in another app, for the same reason that you would never do all your photo color adjustment on a JPEG file if you also have a RAW file for the same image.

Thus, in effect, when you stop paying, you lose access to your files. If Adobe goes out of business, drops support for your platform, or simply prices themselves hopelessly outside your ability to pay, you effectively permanently lose access to your files, because no other app can read them or work with them. I've frequently had to keep old software running long after companies went bankrupt or got bought and dropped those products, so a rental model just isn't something that I'm willing to pay for. It has all the problems inherent to free Google apps, plus all the disadvantages of expensive Adobe software.

I won't even allow *free* software services to become part of any critical path for anything I'm doing. If someone can take away a service at will, that service actually has *negative* value to me. So you can probably guess how likely I am to pay for the privilege of having no long-term guarantee of usability. That just doesn't make financial sense in anything but bizarro world, IMO.

With that said, I started growing concerned about Adobe's support for OS X way back when CS3 came out and it wouldn't even install on case-sensitive HFS+ without horrible hacks, and I've been growing steadily more concerned with Adobe's overall behavior and competence ever since. That's why shortly after I bought Photoshop CS3, I also bought a copy of Pixelmator (version 1-point-something), and have also bought upgrades to Pixelmator even though I don't regularly use it. I viewed that hundred bucks or so as a hedge against Adobe going off the deep end.

Now I'm really glad I did that. Thanks in no small part to funding from lots of other similarly concerned Photoshop users, Pixelmator has seriously improved over those five-and-a-half years. For example, I can't begin to tell you how happy I was to see CMYK support added to Pixelmator late last year; that removed one of the biggest obstacles to me walking away from Photoshop. At this rate, within the next couple of years, I fully expect them to be close to file-format-handling parity with CS3. And by the time CS6 ceases to be runnable on current versions of OS X (without a VM), Photoshop won't even be relevant to me anymore.

_It was love-hate. Now it's just hate._


----------



## dgatwood (May 9, 2013)

cayenne said:


> Ok...my assumption was that the 'archived' version of CS6 Production Suite, if that is one that is offered, would be the same as the one you can purchase today without any need for a cloud connection.



As far as I can tell:


If you buy CS6 as a standalone download or DVD or whatever, you serial number causes their licensing servers to provide you with a permanent license key for your machine that never expires.

If you buy the CC service, the download manager asks the server for a temporary (expiring) license key on a regular basis, and your app keeps working as long as you keep paying.

The difference isn't the software. The difference is whether you have a serial number and a permanent license key derived from it.


----------



## sylvestrerato (May 9, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*

Capture One seems really nice to replace LR but what if you shoot JPGs and not RAWs?

I used Gimp a while back and I think it's quite nice as well and can replace PS, you just need to get used to the new interface like any other software. And by the way I've never liked PS interface.


----------



## dgatwood (May 9, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



hamada said:


> lol.. warez user will have the CC and don´t have to bother about connecting every 30 days.. wager a bet?



I'll take that one step further. I'd give it a week after CS7 ships as a CC-only release. Two weeks, tops.

And FWIW, my estimates tend to be conservative. The last time I made a prediction like this, it involved a company with much better programmers and much deeper knowledge of how to lock software to particular pieces of hardware. My bet was no more than a month. In reality, it took something closer to 10 days, IIRC.

So when I say that I'd give it a week, don't count on more than a day or two. 




Normalnorm said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > The rant thread about Adobe's new subscription model is 6 pages long and growing fast. The thread about alternatives is a mere four posts long, only one of which actually names any software. Makes it pretty clear that no matter how much ranting there is, Adobe can do what they like.
> ...



IMO, Pixelmator is the best of the Photoshop alternatives, at least on the Mac platform. It looks to be a lot closer to being able to actually handle all the features of Photoshop files than any of the others I've looked at so far, though it isn't fully there yet. Since last November, it supports CMYK, but it does not yet support layer effects (promised for 2013) or 16-bit color channels.

I halfway wonder if this isn't Adobe's response to Pixelmator—trying to milk Photoshop for everything they can squeeze out of it, knowing that to compete with newer apps that more fully take advantage of modern OS X technologies, they're going to have to do a major rewrite of a 25-year-old app that has been patched and re-patched so many times that parts of it probably resemble a California city street whose opposite sides are in two different cities....

Either way, I love the post the PM team made on their blog about the whole situation:

http://www.pixelmator.com/blog/


----------



## DFM (May 9, 2013)

Correct. The archived versions of CS you will have access to as a Creative Cloud subscriber will only work during your subscription period. They are provided solely to allow customers to work with files and plugins that need to be on an older version.



dgatwood said:


> As far as I can tell:
> 
> 
> If you buy CS6 as a standalone download or DVD or whatever, you serial number causes their licensing servers to provide you with a permanent license key for your machine that never expires.
> ...


----------



## DFM (May 9, 2013)

Adobe isn't splitting Lightroom into two versions; both perpetual and CC users will get Lr5. The difference is in when the free updates are released and what's inside them. Perpetual licensees get bugfixes and compatibility patches. CC subscribers may also get new features. Nobody's guaranteeing they _will_, just that it's legally possible.

I know this appears to contradict Adobe's argument for moving to CC, but Lightroom is part of the Consumer business along with the Elements line (the full-fat version of Photoshop and co. are in the Creative business unit, who are the ones implementing the CC system). We're not talking about running two different versions (Lr5 and Lr6), but scheduling the release of dot upgrades differently. As existing users of Creative Cloud know, Adobe have already pushed some exclusive new features to them for Dreamweaver, Illustrator, etc; but they're still called CS6. Lr will continue to have major release cycles when the version number increases, we're only talking about what happens in between those times. I'm sure Adobe would like to offer new features to perpetual license holders as well, but the lawyers say no.

The primary sales route for all consumer products is via retail (perpetual licenses and what used to be boxed products), so the fact Lr is also in the CC bundle is more of a side-effect; the same is true of Acrobat. Development will carry on as normal, there are no plans for "Lightroom CC" or "Acrobat CC", neither will Photoshop Elements go subscription-only.




LetTheRightLensIn said:


> DFM said:
> 
> 
> > In future there may well be times when new features appear in the CC-bundled version of Lr which aren't yet in the perpetual version, because Cloud subscribers get new features quicker (as SOX doesn't apply).
> ...


----------



## CTJohn (May 9, 2013)

DFM said:


> Adobe isn't splitting Lightroom into two versions; both perpetual and CC users will get Lr5. The difference is in when the free updates are released and what's inside them. Perpetual licensees get bugfixes and compatibility patches. CC subscribers may also get new features. Nobody's guaranteeing they _will_, just that it's legally possible.
> 
> I know this appears to contradict Adobe's argument for moving to CC, but Lightroom is part of the Consumer business along with the Elements line (the full-fat version of Photoshop and co. are in the Creative business unit, who are the ones implementing the CC system). We're not talking about running two different versions (Lr5 and Lr6), but scheduling the release of dot upgrades differently. As existing users of Creative Cloud know, Adobe have already pushed some exclusive new features to them for Dreamweaver, Illustrator, etc; but they're still called CS6. Lr will continue to have major release cycles when the version number increases, we're only talking about what happens in between those times. I'm sure Adobe would like to offer new features to perpetual license holders as well, but the lawyers say no.
> 
> ...



I'm an amateur photographer who uses Lightroom (4.4) and Photoshop (CS5 Extended.) I haven't updated my version of Photoshop because I use the program a couple times a month, for HDR and layers adjustments. I use Lightroom regularly, but there are many things Lightroom can't do that my version of Photoshop can. Based on the pricing, I guess Adobe just doesn't care about users like me.

I'm no expert on Photoshop, but have invested 20 hours or so in Linda.com training. I have purchased Photomatix for HDR, but will need to find another solution for things like layer/mask work, content aware adjustments, etc. I have no interest in the other applications Adobe wants to offer me as part of the subscription.

I'm sorry I wasted the time over the past couple years learning how to use Photoshop.


----------



## Tayvin (May 9, 2013)

Let me tell you why this is bad for us. If Adobe thought this would be good for industry professionals they would offer an option for a License or a Creative Cloud subscription. There's no option, which means they know most people wouldn't choose the Creative Cloud service. The subscription prices aren't that bad right now, but we all know how Adobe is.


----------



## wsheldon (May 9, 2013)

CTJohn said:


> I'm an amateur photographer who uses Lightroom (4.4) and Photoshop (CS5 Extended.) I haven't updated my version of Photoshop because I use the program a couple times a month, for HDR and layers adjustments. I use Lightroom regularly, but there are many things Lightroom can't do that my version of Photoshop can. Based on the pricing, I guess Adobe just doesn't care about users like me.
> 
> I'm no expert on Photoshop, but have invested 20 hours or so in Linda.com training. I have purchased Photomatix for HDR, but will need to find another solution for things like layer/mask work, content aware adjustments, etc. I have no interest in the other applications Adobe wants to offer me as part of the subscription.
> 
> I'm sorry I wasted the time over the past couple years learning how to use Photoshop.



Very well said. I'm in exactly the same situation. I will no longer invest in Photoshop software, books or training and feel the money I've already spent is partially wasted. At least it appears Lightroom will remain a viable tool for a while yet, but I'll need to explore other pixel-editors if Photoshop Elements won't cut it. Frustrating.


----------



## DFM (May 9, 2013)

CTJohn said:


> I'm an amateur photographer who uses Lightroom (4.4) and Photoshop (CS5 Extended.) I haven't updated my version of Photoshop because I use the program a couple times a month, for HDR and layers adjustments. I use Lightroom regularly, but there are many things Lightroom can't do that my version of Photoshop can. Based on the pricing, I guess Adobe just doesn't care about users like me.



There's nothing to stop you continuing to use Ps CS5, it won't suddenly expire. You can stick with LR4 or upgrade to Lr5 on the normal perpetual license model. You'd only have to subscribe if you wanted the new features in Photoshop CC, in which case your workflow actually suits the new scheme - you can keep Ps CS5 installed, and if you don't use the features in Ps CC very often you can rent it for one month as and when you need it (both versions can be installed together). There will be a few cases when the PSD files created by Ps CC won't be compatible with Ps CS5 (for example if you use TypeKit fonts or the new vector shape layers) but you can flatten out those objects.


----------



## cayenne (May 9, 2013)

DFM said:


> CTJohn said:
> 
> 
> > I'm an amateur photographer who uses Lightroom (4.4) and Photoshop (CS5 Extended.) I haven't updated my version of Photoshop because I use the program a couple times a month, for HDR and layers adjustments. I use Lightroom regularly, but there are many things Lightroom can't do that my version of Photoshop can. Based on the pricing, I guess Adobe just doesn't care about users like me.
> ...



Mr DFM,

Can you answer a question I have?

How much longer will the CS6 suites be offered as stand alone? I'm interested in the CS6 Production suite of tools. Any idea how much longer that will be offered for purchase as stand alone?

Thank you,

cayenne


----------



## cayenne (May 9, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



sylvestrerato said:


> Capture One seems really nice to replace LR but what if you shoot JPGs and not RAWs?
> 
> I used Gimp a while back and I think it's quite nice as well and can replace PS, you just need to get used to the new interface like any other software. And by the way I've never liked PS interface.



The larger question is: Why do you shoot jpgs and not RAWs?

There's really no reason anyone today that has a good camera, capable of shooting RAW to be shooting ONLY jpgs. I can understand shooting both, as that there are times for a quick slide show maybe or immediate needs, but for anyone that Post Processes, there is really no compelling reason to be doing that with anything but RAW images.

??

C


----------



## CTJohn (May 9, 2013)

DFM said:


> CTJohn said:
> 
> 
> > I'm an amateur photographer who uses Lightroom (4.4) and Photoshop (CS5 Extended.) I haven't updated my version of Photoshop because I use the program a couple times a month, for HDR and layers adjustments. I use Lightroom regularly, but there are many things Lightroom can't do that my version of Photoshop can. Based on the pricing, I guess Adobe just doesn't care about users like me.
> ...



I'm already having problems with compatibility. I just bought a 6D and my version of Photoshop does not recognize the CR2 files from that camera. I now need to convert to DNG (which is another "trust me" product from Adobe) to be able to open as layers from Lightroom to Photoshop. This will not get better. I hope someone else realizes there's a market for a lot of non-professional photographers who need more horsepower than Lightroom, but don't need or want the additional "enhancements" Adobe wants to force us to pay for.


----------



## thepancakeman (May 9, 2013)

cayenne said:


> How much longer will the CS6 suites be offered as stand alone? I'm interested in the CS6 Production suite of tools. Any idea how much longer that will be offered for purchase as stand alone?



That's my thinking as well. I'd like to move up to the latest version so that I'm covered for a couple of years until they realize the error of their ways.  That I can find, you already can't purchase it from Adobe directly anymore, but third party vendors still have it.

I'm not anti-Adobe, I'm just anti stupid marketing maneuvers and price gouging. :-\


----------



## Bruce Photography (May 9, 2013)

*Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software*



Old Sarge said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if some new software appears on the horizon to challenge Adobe's place in the market. Seems like a good opportunity for a company to appeal to those not interested in cloud based software.



Perhaps members of this forum and the Nikon forum can band together to get out the word on their experience with other apps than Photoshop. Before Adobe takes away Photoshop from individual users, I would value the experience that others have in using Photoshop's competitors products. I've never been interested in anything other than Photoshop, but enough of this "Cloud" krap.


----------



## Orangutan (May 9, 2013)

thepancakeman said:


> That's my thinking as well. I'd like to move up to the latest version so that I'm covered for a couple of years until they realize the error of their ways.



Maybe that's their plan: boost quarterly earnings by persuading thousands to upgrade before the license change, then say "oops, our mistake," and revert to the previous situation. In the immortal words of Daffy Duck, though, they can only do it once. Daffy Duck in THE BEST ACT in YEAR (and it UNCUT)


----------



## Maui5150 (May 9, 2013)

Zlatko said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > If you are just a photographer and not in multimedia which I find hard to believe, then a version of photoshop is £17 a month which I also see as good value, compared to spending the full outlay on PS Extended which is £649, then a new version will be out in 18 months with an upgrade path of 50% off so thats £900 for one programme. or £204 a year for PS CC.
> ...



Some people just don't want to see it. But yes... for MOST people it is a doubling of price and ultimately that cost has to be absorbed or passed on to the consumer


----------



## Orangutan (May 9, 2013)

Tayvin said:


> Let me tell you why this is bad for us. If Adobe thought this would be good for industry professionals they would offer an option for a License or a Creative Cloud subscription. There's no option, which means they know most people wouldn't choose the Creative Cloud service. The subscription prices aren't that bad right now, but we all know how Adobe is.



In the long run it's not good for Adobe either. The effect of this is that there will be no old, cast-off versions of these products floating around for students and other beginners to play with. They will not get hooked on Adobe products, but will seek out cheap/free alternatives that are "good enough," and then they will take those other products to their working lives. Sure, there are a few specialty jobs for which there is no legitimate competition, but not enough of those to sustain this business model. Adobe are shooting themselves in the foot.


----------



## unfocused (May 10, 2013)

Please sign this online petition. I do not know if it will do any good, but it is certainly more effective than just sitting around on this forum complaining: http://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model#share


----------



## RLPhoto (May 10, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Please sign this online petition. I do not know if it will do any good, but it is certainly more effective than just sitting around on this forum complaining: http://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model#share



Signed and shared.


----------



## Shanly (May 10, 2013)

DFM:

Photoshop is a consumer product as well. The photography oriented parts of Photoshop are used extensively by many amateur photographers, often in conjunction with Lightroom. LR is great but there are many things it cannot do including creative (2nd pass ) sharpening, proper cloning, curves with masks and the various content aware operations.

Of course we can all continue with LR 4 (and apparently 5) and PS CS6 for a while until the day comes when our desktops need replacing and CS6 does not support the version of Windows. Yes, I did read that Adobe has stated that they will support the next version of Windows (let's call it 9), but when 10 comes along, we've had it.

Photoshop Elements does not meet the requirements of the large group of amateur photographers who have graduated from point and shoots and only use RAW files. PSE is more for JPG users.

It would be useful if Adobe recognized that there is a large body of amateur photographers using the LR/PS combination and came out with a pricing model that makes sense for that substantial segment. For example, I suspect that most of this group do not use or need the features of the Extended version of PS.

I would prefer a return to a normal licensed version of PS, but I am a realist. Hence the request for more reasonable pricing that more closely reflects the frequency with which this group purchases updates.

Finally, I cannot find anyway on the Adobe Canada site to purchase PS CS6. Fortunately I have my copy. It appears that everybody who has not already purchased it is out of luck. I was under the impression that it could still be purchased.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (May 10, 2013)

DFM said:


> Adobe isn't splitting Lightroom into two versions; both perpetual and CC users will get Lr5. The difference is in when the free updates are released and what's inside them. Perpetual licensees get bugfixes and compatibility patches. CC subscribers may also get new features. Nobody's guaranteeing they _will_, just that it's legally possible.
> 
> I know this appears to contradict Adobe's argument for moving to CC, but Lightroom is part of the Consumer business along with the Elements line (the full-fat version of Photoshop and co. are in the Creative business unit, who are the ones implementing the CC system). We're not talking about running two different versions (Lr5 and Lr6), but scheduling the release of dot upgrades differently. As existing users of Creative Cloud know, Adobe have already pushed some exclusive new features to them for Dreamweaver, Illustrator, etc; but they're still called CS6. Lr will continue to have major release cycles when the version number increases, we're only talking about what happens in between those times. I'm sure Adobe would like to offer new features to perpetual license holders as well, but the lawyers say no.
> 
> ...


Kudos to you for responding to all the worried users (including myself). Me using LR only, I feel comfortable with the answers you've given us and I for one feel now that I won't need to seek any alternatives.

thanks
J


----------



## bardamu (May 10, 2013)

So I'm reading a novel on public transport and encounter the following passage:
"do not despair, for in the vampire you have a friend, despite your opinion to the contrary."
Not sure why the word "Adobe" popped into my head at that point...

So glad I picked up various boxed Adobe items a few months back. I'll use them until they're well and truly obsolete. I have been playing with Adobe InDesign lately and must say it looks like a very nice piece of software.

I upgraded from a Mesozoic version of Photoshop Elements to CS6 and really like the new one. A friend of mine uses Elements 10 and I can't stand it. The user interface looks tacky in the extreme, if not outright patronising. Looks like something designed for kindy kids to play with, rather than a serious tool for photographic editing. Do I really need swatches of zebra-stripe patterns, etc cluttering up my screen? No thanks.


----------



## drjlo (May 10, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Please sign this online petition. I do not know if it will do any good, but it is certainly more effective than just sitting around on this forum complaining: http://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model#share
> ...



Same here.


----------



## Quasimodo (May 10, 2013)

drjlo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



Same here


----------



## jhanken (May 10, 2013)

As the OP, I feel like this whole thread has gotten a bit crazy, to say the least. I have learned a great deal from you all, but if you won't want to read 17 pages of forum insanity, I believe Scott Kelby has very nicely summarized where we are on this topic, and the punchline is, let us all stop worrying, at least for now. Thanks, everyone, for an interesting read.

http://scottkelby.com/2013/my-take-on-adobes-announcements-yesterday-at-the-max-conference/


----------



## mdmphoto (May 10, 2013)

I buy photoshop, I pay a price upfront, I own the software, I use it as long as I have computer hardware that will run it. I join cc, pay a monthly fee, and when I stop paying the monthly fee I no longer "have" the software regardless of my hardware. Simple math to me. I will probably upgrade to cs 6 and use it until I find some other "bricks and mortar" style own-it-forever bit of software and try to become more proficient and creative in my photography and even less reliant on software to realize my vision. I don't like being strong-armed...


----------



## Quasimodo (May 10, 2013)

jhanken said:


> As the OP, I feel like this whole thread has gotten a bit crazy, to say the least. I have learned a great deal from you all, but if you won't want to read 17 pages of forum insanity, I believe Scott Kelby has very nicely summarized where we are on this topic, and the punchline is, let us all stop worrying, at least for now. Thanks, everyone, for an interesting read.
> 
> http://scottkelby.com/2013/my-take-on-adobes-announcements-yesterday-at-the-max-conference/



Crazy or not, I guess like you, not everyone can stand behind the opinion of everyone on this thread. 

I read Scott Kelby's Q and A, and I take his concocted question and answers (written pretty much like his books, which I might add that I enjoy very much) with a grain of salt. I am not saying that he is Adobe's man, but I believe that he has a bias. 

Further, I think that he does not address the main issue in this writing: The fact that the industry standard is ascerting its power to switch their operations in what I perceive to be a disfavour to its customers. Microsoft tried, but was forced to open up their platforms. Maybe it is time to look back at the writing and rationale of the anti-trust laws in the U.S.


----------



## DFM (May 10, 2013)

Shanly said:


> It would be useful if Adobe recognized that there is a large body of amateur photographers using the LR/PS combination and came out with a pricing model that makes sense for that substantial segment.



I think I already covered that in a previous reply, as did Tom Hogarty on KelbyTV. Adobe are thinking about what options they can offer photographers. Of course I can't say what that might be, but the idea of a 'mini-bundle' of Lr+Ps is an obvious one.

As to purchasing CS6 collection and point product perpetual licenses in Canada, it's absolutely still possible. With apologies for the long URL, here's a direct link to the catalog page:

https://www.adobe.com/ca/products/catalog/cs6._sl_id-contentfilter_sl_catalog_sl_software_sl_creativesuite6.html?start=10

Channel resellers (Amazon, Calumet, B+H, etc.) are all still carrying CS6 and Lr4 perpetual licenses and will start selling one-year blocks of CC subscription on June 17. Lr5 will follow when it's out of beta (I can't confirm the exact date yet).


----------



## Tayvin (May 10, 2013)

I'm actually starting to think Adobe may have just done something good for the marketplace. Adobe hasn't had any competition in the photography realm for the past ten years and they haven't done anything innovative in since CS2. This move to the Creative Cloud, a.k.a. Cash Cow, is causing users to look at alternatives. Fast forward three years and we may have some real choices out there besides Adobe. It will be like another Canon vs. Nikon, which forces innovation.


----------



## zim (May 10, 2013)

Shanly said:


> Photoshop Elements does not meet the requirements of the large group of amateur photographers who have graduated from point and shoots and only use RAW files. PSE is more for JPG users.



How'd you work that one out? I only shoot RAW and happily use Elements


----------



## Meh (May 10, 2013)

Maui5150 said:


> Some people just don't want to see it. But yes... for MOST people it is a doubling of price and ultimately that cost has to be absorbed or passed on to the consumer



MOST people? What are you basing that on... the handful of people who just can't stop whining in this thread? Or because you don't like and want to think you are typical, normal, average, and that your views are correct you want to believe MOST people must see it your way? Perhaps it is YOU that just doesn't want to see that it isn't nearly as bad as you are making it out to be.


----------



## Meh (May 10, 2013)

I just love the thread, in this thread, in which people are whining that this is huge increase in cost because they are happily still using CS3, 4, whatever and since they don't upgrade often Adobe is evil by forcing them to upgrade to the CC versions. Clearly you should just keep using what you're using and/or upgrade to CS6 whenever you need or want to because Adobe has clearly stated they will keep selling CS6 indefinitely.

The entire BS about having no options in the future is complete and utter nonsense. You can buy PS Elements and open and edit your PSD files. I've never used Elements but the general view I've read is that it does most of what PS does and if that's true then perhaps the current version already does much more than previous versions of PS... if money is the issue because you can't afford it, because your'e retired, or you don't need all the fancy new features of every PS release, etc. etc. etc. then wouldn't PS Elements be your logical next upgrade anyway?


----------



## 7enderbender (May 10, 2013)

Here's a question for Mac users out there:

I'm still on my old Windows machines and long overdue for an update on both my main desktop and laptop. I've postponed this and it's not going to happen before the Fall now anyway and there may be some new machines out until then. But I've pretty much decided to move to the Apple world given how much I dislike Win 8 (and Win 7 is not really great either in my experience).

Problem for the photo stuff (and this is why it's in this thread) is my Windows Photoshop license (CS5) that I (according to Adobe) can't transfer to Mac unless I go and buy CS6. Given what Adobe is doing here I'm now even less inclined to do this and would rather stick to CS5 and LR3 which I'm perfectly happy with until a new camera purchase forces me to something newer.

LR3 will run under Mac OS and that now has become (still surprised by that) my go-to tool for 90% of what I do. For the occasional open heart surgery I'd like to run CS5 on a Mac (probably will be a tricked out Mac Mini first) in either Parallels (preferred) or dual boot (if I have to) in Win 7. Is anyone using it this way here? How bad is it? I'd expect it to be still better than what my current old desktop has to offer but thought I might check first. I won't have a gazillion files open or anything like that.


----------



## cayenne (May 10, 2013)

7enderbender said:


> Here's a question for Mac users out there:
> 
> I'm still on my old Windows machines and long overdue for an update on both my main desktop and laptop. I've postponed this and it's not going to happen before the Fall now anyway and there may be some new machines out until then. But I've pretty much decided to move to the Apple world given how much I dislike Win 8 (and Win 7 is not really great either in my experience).
> 
> ...



Easy Peasy!!

Do what I do....I have a mac as my main machine (I also have LInux boxes, but that's another thread).
You install VMWare on your mac...and thay way, you can run OSX, and you can run Windows (whatever version you want) in the VM (Virtual Machine), all concurrently. It doesn't even make my macbook pro hiccup running them both at the same time. I use Windows in the VM for the few windows applications I need.

While I was originally going to buy Adobe CS6 Production for mac...I'm considering possibly buying it for windows and running it on my windows VM, and that way I can "lock it in time" with the VM version of the operating system, and happily keep upgrading OSX and not have to worry with that breaking compatibility with the soon to be aging Adobe CS6 products.

HTH,

cayenne


----------



## Shanly (May 10, 2013)

zim said:


> Shanly said:
> 
> 
> > Photoshop Elements does not meet the requirements of the large group of amateur photographers who have graduated from point and shoots and only use RAW files. PSE is more for JPG users.
> ...



It's great that Elements works for you. My point is that Adobe clearly aims at the family photographer producing JPGs. The almost complete lack of 16 bit support (why bother when JPGs are 8 bit), ACR with many features disabled, restrictions on curves and adjustment layers, etc, etc, and the whole template scheme for thngs such as greeting cards and albums support the conclusion about its intended market. Once again, it's great that it works for you and maybe you're better off than the rest of us who have become used to making extensive use of these features.

In response to other postings regarding Scott Kelby's Q&A - Scott says that at some point in the future if you don't like an increase in price you can simply stop paying. This is utter nonsense since you then lose access to your data!

Now imagine if you are renting Lightroom and then stop paying. Now you are completely locked out of all adjustments that you have made while paying over perhaps years. Scary stuff.


----------



## pdirestajr (May 10, 2013)

Perhaps people will now start using in-camera processing and that _never used_ print button! No need for a computer!!!! Or we could all just go back to shooting film!


----------



## RLPhoto (May 10, 2013)

pdirestajr said:


> Perhaps people will now start using in-camera processing and that _never used_ print button! No need for a computer!!!! Or we could all just go back to shooting film!



What's funny is that I do use the process in camera and Print button quite a bit now with the 5D3. ;D


----------



## camlars (May 10, 2013)

Shanly said:


> In response to other postings regarding Scott Kelby's Q&A - Scott says that at some point in the future if you don't like an increase in price you can simply stop paying. This is utter nonsense since you then lose access to your data!



That is utter nonsense. If you decide to stop your subscription just batch convert your PSD's to an open format.


----------



## Forceflow (May 10, 2013)

camlars said:


> Shanly said:
> 
> 
> > In response to other postings regarding Scott Kelby's Q&A - Scott says that at some point in the future if you don't like an increase in price you can simply stop paying. This is utter nonsense since you then lose access to your data!
> ...



Could you tell me which open format supports everything the PS does and an converter that will actually convert my psd into that? I would seriously love to have that


----------



## gary samples (May 10, 2013)

I don't have all the info on what Adobe is going to do with Photoshop so I will just have to wait and see but I will NEVER sign up for CC. I buy the update Avery time it comes out since Elements I Now have CS6 would cost ME 150.00 Avery 1 1/2 - 2 years or so to me that's 6.25 per month and I own it ! 
I really like Adobe products but if they go this way I'm done !! 
sorry Adobe hope you wake up before it's to late .


----------



## Ladislav (May 10, 2013)

Forceflow said:


> camlars said:
> 
> 
> > Shanly said:
> ...



The point is: It is not about the format. The format itself is described on Adobe developers portal. I'm not sure if it is a complete specification but if it is not it will be fairly quickly reverse engineered. But the PSD file is nothing without Photoshop. PSD is just set of data about layers, masks and their configuration. If you want to load that data and make changes you need Photoshop or software implementing the same algorithms (some of them can be Adobe's intellectual property). If you don't want to make changes, you don't need to store your photos in PSD format.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 10, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> Forceflow said:
> 
> 
> > camlars said:
> ...



Who said anything about photo's? What about designs? Painted Artwork? ???


----------



## Ladislav (May 11, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Ladislav said:
> 
> 
> > Forceflow said:
> ...



Well I'm on the forum about photography so I'm talking mainly about photos. Are you a professional making money by Photoshop? In such case $240 per year should be really small investment for you which you can easily put to your costs. Even as hobbyist from much poorer country I can imagine paying that if I really need Photoshop to get the best from my hobby. 

The rant about Adobe's business decission reminds me all rants about Canon vs. Nikon, about Canon not releasing something, etc. The core of these rants is to make some disappointment look like a global problem where there is actually no problem at all. 

Nothing has changed for people who already own any Photoshop license. They don't need to subscribe if they don't want to. Their product still works and its lifetime will one day end in the same way as it would end for any other SW product. They will just don't have any option to upgrade without subscription. Not choosing to subscribe will not invalidate their existing license or existing PSD files. Those who don't have licence yet can either quickly buy CS6, use subscription or simly don't care.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 11, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Ladislav said:
> ...



Money isn't the main issue, It's the transfer of power from end users to adobe. It's a principle that after spending thousands for software, its not enough for adobe, we must pay the same $$$$ and now own nothing.


----------



## Ladislav (May 11, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Ladislav said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Idea of software ownership is quite fragile anyway. It is similar to owning movie on HD DVD. You paid for it, you own the license but buying a player to use your license is more and more complicated. Subscription model gives you always the last version with all features and fixes and for the operating system you are using at the moment (moreover I read somewhere that it gives you license for two computers - good if you have a workstation and laptop). 

People don't like changes and subscription model is a big change in the way how we get SW. It will become more common in the future and people will accept it eventually.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 11, 2013)

^Ok, Lets simplify.

Would you rather pay adobe 600$ and keep the software or not? The prices are about the same.


----------



## Ladislav (May 11, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> ^Ok, Lets simplify.
> 
> Would you rather pay adobe 600$ and keep the software or not? The prices are about the same.



If I have the money, need the sw and have the choice to own it, I would pay the whole sum and keep the sw. Who doesn't? But in any other case renting doesn't seem so bad as people are trying to pretend here.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 11, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > ^Ok, Lets simplify.
> ...



Who doesn't? Adobe doesn't want you to own those retail CD's. It's less money in their pockets because you, the consumer, will decide if the next upgrade is worth buying. You own the copies, you have the power to decide if and when you will invest more into adobe. 

In turn, Adobe has to provide good solid updates to each version to get your cash. It's incentive for them to try harder. A subscription model will dull that edge and adobe will have less incentive to do so.

I think a Subscription model alongside side a perpetual license is a good thing. People will little cash can subscribe and heavy users can get the retail copies they need. If enough users petition adobe (which I have), I believe they'll let both co-exist.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (May 11, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Ladislav said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...


+1
I think it's alot about giving up control. You can jump versions like you can with the hardware. Imagine if Canon would try to force people to go througj every hardware release, how silly wouldn't that be.


----------



## ksagomonyants (May 11, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Ladislav said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



My guess is that if Adobe lowered the cost of the monthly fees, a lot more people would be happy to switch to CC. It's the price which makes many people frustrated about Adobe.


----------



## unfocused (May 11, 2013)

There are lots of ways Adobe could have made this more attractive to consumers. 

Instead of a one-year rental, they could have offered longer terms at discount. $20/month is actually not a bad deal. But that's their "special introductory" pricing for CS6 owners. That creates uncertainty and Adobe has pretty much said they intend to jack up the price next year. If I could lock in for $20/month over 3-5 years it would be much easier to swallow.

No reason they had to base it on unlimited usage. Allow persons who don't use every program every day to pay a small fee when they are using a program. 

No reason why the model had to be based on unlimited programs. They could offer a plan where people would pay for their choice of 3, 5, or 8 programs for example. You want Photoshop, Illustrator and Dreamweaver. Somebody else needs Fireworks, InDesign and Dreamweaver, etc. 

Point is, Adobe adopted a very narrow profit-maximizing model, rather than a customer-based model. Scott Kelby and others who owe their living to Adobe can talk to their blue in the face about what a great deal this is, but the customers know otherwise.

If you offer a choice and people take you up on it, it's a good deal.

If you don't offer a choice and force people to take something, it's not going to be a good deal. 

Adobe, sadly, didn't have enough confidence in their own product to try to win customers by attracting them to the product, instead they chose a forced model.


----------



## Ladislav (May 11, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Ladislav said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Yes Adobe made a change but no matter what we think it is their full right. 

The petition is in my opinion useless. You will not go to announce this to take it back few months later. You can be pretty sure that they expected this wave of resistance. This is not type of public announcement any company would do without 100% confidence that they will succeed - especially if they don't have any market competition which would force them to perform such radical change.

You can hope for more interesting pricing in case of long term subscription, for some promotion sale or moving some pro features to Lightroom or PSE (even if it would mean increasing their price tags) but there is IMHO no hope for return of CS product line. 

If you want a retail product you should start looking for competition and buy their product now to support its further development. That is actually the only way how you can show Adobe your opposition - not spending money for subscription is not enough. You must support the competition and hope that they will get close to quality of Adobe products before your CS products will be completely unsupported (stop working for any reason). But at the end of the day most people will not do this and pay subscription anyway because it is more convenient = Adobe will win.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 11, 2013)

So, if you'd rather buy the software and pay the same? Who's being greedy? You or Adobe?

Adobe has revoked policy's before if enough users speak out with their wallets and words, it could be reversed. Now, if CC is irreversible, I will be using CS6 until an alternative is found. That right there is $$$$ out of adobes CC's pocket.


----------



## camlars (May 11, 2013)

Forceflow said:


> Could you tell me which open format supports everything the PS does and an converter that will actually convert my psd into that? I would seriously love to have that



Who said anything about a format that supports everything that PSD does? You claimed you would lose access to your data, which is false. You can easily export all the layers to individual PNG files and open them in pretty much whatever software you want to use. 

If you want other software that can read PSD files and will let you work with layers, you could try for example:

- Pixelmator, $15
- Photoshop Elements 11, $60 at Amazon at the moment, with free shipping

I can't believe the amount of whining over a $20 a month subscription to Photoshop, $10 the first year if you already have an earlier version...


----------



## preppyak (May 11, 2013)

camlars said:


> Forceflow said:
> 
> 
> > Could you tell me which open format supports everything the PS does and an converter that will actually convert my psd into that? I would seriously love to have that
> ...


This is a major paradigm change from the previous versions. If I own CS5, my files don't become obselete if I dont want to pay for CS6, right? Now they do within the Adobe realm. People can still use CS2 even though it was released in 2005 (they'd pay $1000's for that in CC)...yet the day Adobe checks my license and its not paid, I lose it now. Sure, I might be able to pay for another program that can handle the files, but before this change, I would just keep using Photoshop forever if I wanted.

Now, there might be advantages (more frequent upgrades, cloud storage, etc), but, none of us have actually experienced those yet. We've just seen the price hike and a major shift in how things work. It's understandable people are unhappy, even if it ends up being brilliant. Adobe has to deliver a significantly better experience for the change to be worth it.



> I can't believe the amount of whining over a $20 a month subscription to Photoshop, $10 the first year if you already have an earlier version...


Because that $120 I spent in the first year is a good way to the price of an upgrade from the previous year's model (usually $199). I usually go 3 years between upgrades, so I now would spend $360 for that instead of $199...and I might get more updates in the process.

If that $20 was a locked in rate I think people might be less mad, but, it's definitely gonna go up after that first year. So, that $250/yr becomes


----------



## zim (May 11, 2013)

Shanly said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > Shanly said:
> ...




Please don't think I'm in agreement with Adobe on this I'm not I really hope they get burnt.

Your right I don’t (think) I have the need to work in 16bit. I enjoy prints, maybe I'm missing a trick and should be working 16bit? 
LR4 isn’t CC and used by many pros I assume that does allow you to work in 16bit?

As for the advanced manipulation tools, for photographers? maybe some of those amateur photographers who have graduated from point and shoots should go back and hone their photopgaphic skills rather than their PS skills or maybe that's me just being a synical old git, anyway that’s another debate not for this thread! ;D


----------



## cayenne (May 11, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> People don't like changes and subscription model is a big change in the way how we get SW. It will become more common in the future and people will accept it eventually.



I sincerely hope *not*.

By having a consumer revolt, and not just letting this 'go' as many seem to want to do.....we might just let the corporations know this is not a path the consumer wants to be forced down.

Believe it or not, the one thing even large companies listen to is....the loud voice of the consumer pocketbook opening or closing.

If enough people unite against this....the voice will be heard. 

A recent example, is the latest release of the game Sim City, which required an always 'on' internet connection to play what is essentially at its heart, a single player game.

Sales of that game were WAY below what was projected. People simply refused to be forced down that road on that game. Possibly EA will listen next time? If this type thing happens enough, well, they DO want to make $$ off you and that's the bottom line.

If you simple take it as a given and roll over, then sure...Adobe and other will go down this path.

Vote with your wallet, it is plain and simple.

C


----------



## Ladislav (May 11, 2013)

cayenne said:


> Ladislav said:
> 
> 
> > People don't like changes and subscription model is a big change in the way how we get SW. It will become more common in the future and people will accept it eventually.
> ...



You chose probably the worst example. EA is the symbol of companies not looking at customers feedback. Just go through their releases in past few years. A lot of them were disappointments with pretty negative feedback - Orgin included. The sales problem of Sim City was not in the "always online" but in the quality of the game. Gamers already showed many times that "always on" is not actually a problem (even you can read about it all over the internet). We can put another example - Diablo III which shows that even with such "a big problem" like always on the game can have a huge commercial success. 

As a side note I own about two hundreds games for PC (physical media and Steam) and XBox360. I really wish I could get them through some sort of subscription instead. It would save me a lot of $$$. End of off-topic ...

Subscription model is already visible in business environment where whole products are offered as a service and it slowly creeps into customer environment with different subscription based services or even products - for example Office 365. There are also subscription based products where you own the product at the end of the subscription but then you generally pay almost the whole product (or upgrade) every release cycle so its more like software assurance then a real subscription. So far I see subscription as more affordable way to get an expensive software even if it means paying more in the long term.


----------



## unfocused (May 11, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> ...So far I see subscription as more affordable way to get an expensive software even if it means paying more in the long term.



Except that with the "Creative Cloud" system it is not a more affordable way to get expensive software. The "affordable" model Adobe instituted and followed for at least two decades was the "upgrade" path. Make your initial investment in the software and then, over time, you can receive discounted upgrades and expansions, until ultimately, you have a full suite of software available to you at a substantial savings. 

The trade off was clear – you got rewarded for being a loyal customer and Adobe had a built-in base of customers for software upgrades. One of the frustrations with the new Cloud system is that Adobe is changing the rules on users who have played by their rules.

I've done the math every which way and even with the special introductory pricing, customers end up paying more. But, as others have said, the money is only a part of the problem. Many long-time users felt some loyalty to Adobe and were their best advocates. There are many other issues as well.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 11, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > Ladislav said:
> ...



And as soon as the company goes under good luck every playing your game (or protected music) again.
Or if the companies get into a rights battle.

subscription/streaming stinks


----------



## Meh (May 11, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Ladislav said:
> 
> 
> > ...So far I see subscription as more affordable way to get an expensive software even if it means paying more in the long term.
> ...



You could not possibly have missed Ladislav's point any more, which was it's a more affordable way to get into the software since there is no one time outlay for the first purchase... the monthly payment plan spreads out your total cost in even predictable amounts at regular intervals which is more manageable even though the total cost over a longer period of time is higher. Like leasing a car.

I haven't read every single post on this topic, but has anyone considered the tax benefit of the subscription model. If you make any money at all from photography, I presume you write off expenses. The monthly payments would be fully deductible each year.

The other thing I've noticed is many people are comparing the sum of monthly payments compared to upgrading at $199 every 24 months. First of all, the upgrade cycle was not always 24 months it was closer to 18-20 month on average I believe. Second, correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it only the CS6 upgrade that was $199 and previous upgrade prices were around $300? Regardless of that, there is no certainty that if Adobe continued to sell boxed upgrades that it would have been $199 in the future, eventually the price would go up. So it's hard to say what the long term cost of maintaining a current version of PS would cost over the next 10 years.


----------



## ksagomonyants (May 12, 2013)

Even Hitler hates Adobe CC 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67Iw9q2X9cU


----------



## Click (May 12, 2013)

Ha ha ha hilarious ;D


----------



## Hobby Shooter (May 12, 2013)

ksagomonyants said:


> Even Hitler hates Adobe CC
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67Iw9q2X9cU


There's also a good one where he hates Nikon.


----------



## pwp (May 13, 2013)

Here's an alternative to Photoshop, Photoshop Elements with this $50 plugin:
https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2013/04/02/elementsxxl-plug-in-promises-photoshop-features-without-the-pricetag

It looks like this useful plugin unlocks a LOT of the functionality of the full PS right there in Elements.

-PW


----------



## Quasimodo (May 13, 2013)

Hobby Shooter said:


> ksagomonyants said:
> 
> 
> > Even Hitler hates Adobe CC
> ...



Hillarious! I've seen many other versions, but this one is funny.


----------



## M.ST (May 13, 2013)

I hate cloud software. I have a PC only for the internet and not willing to go online with a pc with all my images on the harddisc.

If Adobe is not willing to bring offline software like Photoshop CS6 Extended on the market and enables the download for the new camera raw updates then I change to another product.

Adobe, you are loosing a lot of money in the future if you have only cloud software.


----------



## Dick (May 13, 2013)

I'm not really sure why this matters though. Can't people just use CS6? I bet that most people could do their photoshopping using the old & now free CS2.



M.ST said:


> If Adobe is not willing to bring offline software like Photoshop CS6 Extended on the market and enables the download for the new camera raw updates then I change to another product.



Why? Why not just use CS6? Is there something superior offered by another company?


----------



## alexanderferdinand (May 13, 2013)

I own (a license) for PS CS6. 
I dont like the monthly fee, because I want to decide if I need the latest s* or not.

Like someone mentioned before: its like Canon forces you to have the latest model.
(I´m still happy with my 1D4).
And I want to decide to pay the package once when I want.

Its not the money, I have enough. I simply dont like to be pushed in the "rental" path.

My 2 €- cents.


----------



## Ladislav (May 13, 2013)

M.ST said:


> I hate cloud software. I have a PC only for the internet and not willing to go online with a pc with all my images on the harddisc.



Looks like you don't understand a difference between cloud software / storage and just subscription with cloud server to validate your software license. You don't have to put any of your PSDs to cloud. You even don't have to be always online to use CC products. You just need to download the product, install it and occasionally get connected to internet to get updates and validate license.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (May 13, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> M.ST said:
> 
> 
> > I hate cloud software. I have a PC only for the internet and not willing to go online with a pc with all my images on the harddisc.
> ...


i think he got it, it was probably more of a general statement. I agree with him on that one.


----------



## smithy (May 13, 2013)

Hmm... in 2008 I bought CS4 Design Premium for around $400 (as a student). I still use it five years on.

With the new CC subscription, the cost of ownership by now would have been around $1800. If I had remained a student from 2008 until now it would have cost me $720 (they offer 60% discount for students). But I was only a student for one year (mid-life crisis), meaning the price from then until now would have been *$1584*.

I know which model I prefer.

As a side note: to those that had CS4, but now use CS6, are there many improvements between the two versions? If there's enough incentive, I'll just buy a student copy of CS6 DP while I still can (my wife's now the student)... it's still $400...


----------



## Meh (May 13, 2013)

Dick said:


> I'm not really sure why this matters though. Can't people just use CS6? I bet that most people could do their photoshopping using the old & now free CS2.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, they can keep using CS6 for years to come. No, there is nothing superior offered by another company. Despite some people's claims about how Adobe has bungled every release and will be out of business soon, PS is the undisputed champ of photo editing software.


----------



## Meh (May 13, 2013)

smithy said:


> Hmm... in 2008 I bought CS4 Design Premium for around $400 (as a student). I still use it five years on.
> 
> With the new CC subscription, the cost of ownership by now would have been around $1800. If I had remained a student from 2008 until now it would have cost me $720 (they offer 60% discount for students). But I was only a student for one year (mid-life crisis), meaning the price from then until now would have been *$1584*.
> 
> ...



Having your wife buy PS at the student price for you, who is not a student, is essentially pirating the software. If you're willing to pirate the software part way, why not just go all the way and download it from the net for free.


----------



## Harry Muff (May 13, 2013)

Meh said:


> smithy said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm... in 2008 I bought CS4 Design Premium for around $400 (as a student). I still use it five years on.
> ...




Oh, FFS…


----------



## smithy (May 13, 2013)

Meh said:


> smithy said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm... in 2008 I bought CS4 Design Premium for around $400 (as a student). I still use it five years on.
> ...


Honestly? So you're saying that if you came to my house and logged onto my computer and used my student copy of CS4, which I purchased LEGITIMATELY, you are pirating the software? My wife and I live in the same house and share the same computer... I have the license for Windows 7 and Office on my computer, but my wife also uses that software - is she pirating from Microsoft now? I think you've got it really quite wrong.


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > Ladislav said:
> ...



You know, I'm seeing several posters with extremely *LOW* numbers of posts.

I have to think we have some 'shills' on the list here, they seem to be endlessly promoting the merits of this new Adobe plan.

Just my suspicions.

C


----------



## Meh (May 13, 2013)

smithy said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > smithy said:
> ...



I don't have it wrong at all... using someone elses software on their computer that they legitimately purchased is typically allowed under licencing agreements. But having someone else, regardless of whether it is a family member, buy a student version intended for your use, when you are not a student, is not allowed.

In this case, your wife may have purchased the student version legitimately you YOU didn't. You are not a student and are not using the software in the capacity of a student.


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

Meh said:


> smithy said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm... in 2008 I bought CS4 Design Premium for around $400 (as a student). I still use it five years on.
> ...



Geez Man,

How long have you been *working for Adobe*....?

C


----------



## Meh (May 13, 2013)

Harry Muff said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > smithy said:
> ...



How should I take your comment... "Oh, FFS" you didn't realize that... or "Oh, FFS"... I'm being too technical...

My point is meant to be illustrative... people are whining on and on about the new CC model and the higher costs and in some cases are claiming Adobe will lose customers and because they don't like it here's how they're going to get around it. Frankly, I don't care and don't judge anyone who buys a student version when they are not a student or outright pirates it.... but don't take some solice in the fact that you're only somewhat violating the license terms. If you know you're not a student but go out of your way to get a student copy just to save some money and not pay Adobe's price... then you're halfway pirating it... so go all the way and download it for free. It's quite easy.


----------



## Meh (May 13, 2013)

cayenne said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > smithy said:
> ...



I don't and per my other response just posted my point is meant to be illustrative... a person is either playing by the rules or they aren't... if you're willing and comfortable going around the rules to save some money then just download it for free. People tend to legitimize and justify their behavior as long as it's "not too bad" or "I had no choice" or "it's not my fault" etc. But that's BS.

Edit: just another though on this topic... it's rather interesting to discuss copyright issues in relation to photography... I've often wondered if Adobe (for example) suffers less piracy than other software companies because photographers in general are going to be more sensitive to copyright due to self interest... we all depend on copyright to protect our work so perhaps it's less likely that photographers would pirate photo software?


----------



## unfocused (May 13, 2013)

Regarding Student-Teacher Software licenses, does anyone know what the licensing agreement actually says, or are we just having a bar stool legal discussion?

I've never purchased the educational version. I wonder what the agreement actually requires. Does it prohibit other household members from using the software? Does one need to be registered in a course that requires the software? Can you purchase software not related to the classes you are taking (for example, if a taking an HTML course, can you only purchase Dreamweaver, or are you eligible to purchase the entire suite?)

I always thought part of the purpose of educational software was to promote the product by establishing a base of students who know and use the program and then, when they leave school, they will be more inclined to a) encourage their employers to use that software program and b) when they advance to the point where they are making purchasing decisions for their employers they will be more likely to select the software. 

In other words, I always thought it was as much a marketing tool as anything. That was, I assumed, one reason why the purchasing rules are rather lax, but the company offers no upgrade path. 

Following Meh's logic, it seems that a student who buys CS6 to use a part of a hobby that is unrelated to school work might also be guilty of pirating the software.


----------



## Meh (May 13, 2013)

@unfocused you're absolutely correct, it is a marketing tactic... to build a base as you said but also simple "segmented marketing" in which you charge a lower price to certain groups (students, seniors, etc.) who are less likely to buy at full price. But it only works if there is a clear and enforceable differentiating factor among those groups. Age works well because it's unambiguous but it's only enforceable for certain things like movie tickets... it doesn't work well for software. "Personal" vs. "Business" actually doesn't work well because it's not always clear so what usually is done is to omit business features form a home version. "Student" works well for software because you can require a valid registration at at an accredited school but you still need to put some protection which can be leaving out certain functions or not being able to upgrade.

Software is almost never transferable. It is only valid for the person who licenses it (not necessarily who pays) and you can not transfer to another person or company if you decide you don't need it. You can buy used software but it's technically not allowed... it's just very difficult to enforce. 

It should be pretty plain that it is not allowed to have a student buy you a discounted version if you are not a student. The argument that "your wife" is a student might seem valid because you might think of it is a "family purchase" but it's not. Anyone can use the software that's installed on one machine but should the "family" pay for the license according to the lowest priced user or the highest. I didn't go read the Adobe license agreement to confirm so if someone knows better please speak up but I think the answer is the "highest".


----------



## privatebydesign (May 13, 2013)

I wonder how long it will take the crackers to break the phone home requirement? Given their past performances I'd say within a few months.

Adobe collected $300,000,000 via CC during its first year, sounds a lot but it isn't for a $21B corporation. The stock price has fallen a touch since the announcement. Whilst the stock market likes the idea of the rental software model and the steady income it brings, they know there is going to be a backlash for the first companies that do it.

Adobe are desperate for people to adopt the model, absolutely desperate, hence the hiding of CS6, the introductory offers, the forum apologists who are employed by Adobe to be here and every other forum I have seen ( http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=367787 ) etc etc, they need to show good conversion numbers as it is a direct figure for income potential and it will affect the share price. Unlike an upgrade cycle where people have been able to pick and choose if an upgrade is worth the price, the onus used to be on Adobe to keep coming up with new and compelling features, now the onus is on the user to keep paying, new features or not.

As I see it the real "issue" for Adobe is not us smaller user photographers, hell we can work around corporate greed just the same as ever, just keep CS4-5-6, buy LR5, render using LR and when OS's don't support that anymore set up a dedicated Mac Mini, or Windows whatever, as a dedicated image computer (I did that just over a year ago and couldn't be happier), nor is an issue the big heavy users who do want and need every new feature in their big graphics departments. The real battleground for Adobe is the smaller genuine businesses, the 4-10 user license group, they need a lot of convincing to adopt this new model.

I am related to a family of printers, the various family members own small print outlets all over the world, individually the shops fall into the 4-10 license group and they are doing some serious soul searching. However good their cash flows look they have all had hard times. They are very resistant to the idea that they won't be able to buy a perpetual license and stick it on one machine in the corner and always have access to the program that made their customer files. It is a very common situation for customers to come back years later to use graphics that were made previously. They don't like the idea one bit that the shift of power has flipped so completely to Adobe, they know they will not be in the position to miss a payment, ever, for ever, or that Adobe can up the price whenever they like whether it is reasonable or not. 

To most of them it just doesn't make economic sense to tie their work and output to a program that only works via subscription. They are actively looking for work a rounds, they intend to get one CC per shop and isolate it, see how it goes, but do 90%+ of their work on their current CS6 licenses. 

These are the users who's adoption rates will be the making or breaking of the subscription model. And despite Adobe's commitment to the new model, it could be broken comparatively easily, there are special verification free versions out there..........


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Regarding Student-Teacher Software licenses, does anyone know what the licensing agreement actually says, or are we just having a bar stool legal discussion?
> 
> I've never purchased the educational version. I wonder what the agreement actually requires. Does it prohibit other household members from using the software? Does one need to be registered in a course that requires the software? Can you purchase software not related to the classes you are taking (for example, if a taking an HTML course, can you only purchase Dreamweaver, or are you eligible to purchase the entire suite?)
> 
> ...



According to the Adobe site, all you have to do is show a Student ID that is valid, and having a valid .edu email address also helps.

Frankly, I'm working now to register with a local college, for $50 I can get a student ID, and I will use that to buy the CS6 suite, for my own use. Plain, simple, legal.

And I have read the FAQ from Adobe themselves, and it is perfectly legal to use this educational copy for commercial uses.

http://www.adobe.com/sea/special/education/students/studentteacheredition/faq.html

Look under the "How can I use my software" section.

C


----------



## Meh (May 13, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> The onus used to be on Adobe to keep coming up with new and compelling features...



Very true... and it could very well be that compelling advancements are going to get fewer and further apart, that happens with most technology. In the early years there are a lot of new developments but after a while the easy and obvious stuff is done and it gets harder and harder to come up with the next great feature.

Unless there is some feature of PS CC that is really needed or wanted, then anyone who currently owns PS should probably upgrade to CS6 and wait to see how things go with CC and if new features get added continually over time as Adobe is suggesting. Not much harm in doing that, it's a cautious approach.


----------



## unfocused (May 13, 2013)

cayenne said:


> According to the Adobe site, all you have to do is show a Student ID that is valid, and having a valid .edu email address also helps.
> 
> Frankly, I'm working now to register with a local college, for $50 I can get a student ID, and I will use that to buy the CS6 suite, for my own use. Plain, simple, legal.
> 
> ...



Wow! That agreement is much looser than I imagined. I didn't know they allowed it for commercial use and I didn't know there was an upgrade path. Very interesting. Honestly, the agreement almost seems to be inviting abuse – allowing persons to buy one edition every year, accepting anyone employed by a school, etc.


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

unfocused said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > According to the Adobe site, all you have to do is show a Student ID that is valid, and having a valid .edu email address also helps.
> ...



That's likely the reason for its existence in the first place.

And while companies don't 'like' pirating (which the educational version method is NOT), it is largely accepted as a method to get their software out there in a large fashion, which will often lead to legit purchases.

MS Windows owes a *LARGE* bit of their worldwide popularity and leadership in the market, to piracy. Piracy helped MS Windows spread throughout the world....and they benefit from this even to this day. No, they won't earn a dollar from everyone using it, but it is now so prevalent, that any legit commercial interest WILL have legitimate purchased licensed copies, as that it isn't worth them getting an audit and being fined heavily.

But yes, do read the TOS for the educational versions....and if you follow the letter of the regulations, it isn't piracy, even though some may have 'moral' misgivings about doing it. You don't have to follow the intent of it...just the letter of it.

This isn't a law after all.

C


----------



## unfocused (May 13, 2013)

Private, you make a number of excellent points. 

Your examples are just some of many that I think Adobe hasn't thought through. 

I think one of the interesting things will be how this plays out over the next year and a half. Because of their introductory pricing, I suspect many will access the service for the first year, while holding on to those copies of CS6. The real impact on Adobe may not show up until August, 2014, when all those entities who took the introductory pricing the first year fail to renew. 

I think Adobe is gambling that they can sell customers on the subscription model over the next year. The problem with that gamble is I don't see that Adobe has a good exit strategy, but Adobe is giving their customers a year or more to devise their own exit strategy and is giving their competitors a year to get to market with alternative products. 

As I said at the beginning of this discussion, I can really see Corel being a strong acquisition target for a company like Google, which already owns NIK and has the resources to develop a strong competitor.


----------



## Dantana (May 13, 2013)

I'd be really curious to see a breakdown of Adobe users by business size/type.

I work for a smallish multimedia company and we have been on subscription for our 3D software for some time now. With that software (Maya and Max) it makes sense due to backward compatibility issues, upgrade pricing, etc. We haven't taken the leap here with our Adobe software yet, still on CS5. It wouldn't end up being a horrible deal for the company to go CC and it would open up some cross platform usage that is an issue here from time to time.

For my home use I'm bothered by the whole thing. I can't justify the annual cost based on what I do at home, especially since at the moment none of it is bringing in any money. If I was freelancing it would be different. I'm on a really old version right now that works for some programs on Windows 7, but not others (CS1).


----------



## smithy (May 13, 2013)

From what I've read since this little side topic began, I'm convinced that using my wife's student version of CS6 Design Premium on a shared household computer is legal and not a form of 'piracy'.

After checking Adobe's rules on educational use, I've found that they are even more relaxed than they were 5 years ago when I bought CS4. As mentioned by someone else, you can now use the student version for commercial purposes (this was expressly forbidden in CS4), you can install it on 2 computers (used to be 1), and you can upgrade it. It also clearly states that you can continue to use the student versions after you've finished your time as a student.

Another point is that you don't need to have an educational requirement for one of their products in order to purchase (e.g., you don't have to be a photography student to buy Photoshop - just a student).

Still, I'm glad 'Meh' made me explore the legalities further, and now I can sleep easier.


----------



## drjlo (May 21, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Because of their introductory pricing, I suspect many will access the service for the first year, while holding on to those copies of CS6.



I'm also thinking about going to CS6 from my current CS5 and watch how things go with subscription model, but what about this Adobe Application Manager that I apparently am forced to download for CS6 and all the complaints about it on the web? 

What truly useful feature does CS6 have over CS5?


----------



## cayenne (May 21, 2013)

drjlo said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Because of their introductory pricing, I suspect many will access the service for the first year, while holding on to those copies of CS6.
> ...



I'd not heard of this yet...do you have any links pertaining to Adobe App Manager, and problems with it?
Just from the sound of it, it sounds like the Windows Manager type thing that MS came out with a few years ago when trying to update things, etc....

TIA,

cayenne


----------



## unfocused (May 21, 2013)

cayenne said:


> drjlo said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



I've been using CS6 for nearly a year. As far as I know, Adobe Application Manger seems to be just an updater that tells me when they have updated the software (bug fixes, etc.) and then automatically downloads the fixes. I've never had a problem with it.


----------



## bitm2007 (May 22, 2013)

Hi Guys

There is an interesting new post titled 'Creating something better than Photoshop CC', on the Adobe Forum

A link is below

http://forums.adobe.com/message/5341658#5341658

I would be in favour of either option mentioned


----------



## wickidwombat (May 23, 2013)

*Ode to Adobe CC*

Oh Adobe how do I love thee,
take my credit card for your monthly fee.
My work ever more trapped in a bastion
bound and shackled by your subscription.
No more software for us to buy and own 
but only in perpetual servitude use on loan
Thy minions scour the land for signs of dissent
Where resistance builds against software for rent.
Customers silenced if they be not full of joy
at being beholden to Adobe's ploy.
The lowly customer, Adobe's golden goose,
now suffers at the hangmans noose.

:-*


----------



## tombu (May 23, 2013)

*Re: Ode to Adobe CC*

http://youtu.be/xgEOEzpSS40


----------



## vjlex (May 23, 2013)

*Re: Ode to Adobe CC*



wickidwombat said:


> Oh Adobe how do I love thee,
> take my credit card for your monthly fee.
> My work ever more trapped in a bastion
> bound and shackled by your subscription.
> ...



impressive. i'm moved! ;D


----------



## sulla (May 23, 2013)

*Adobe Creative Cloud - future development slowdown?*

Hi!

Just a thought that came to my mind, that has nothing to do with the cost for us consumers:

Does anybody else fear, too, that Adobe might slow down development of Creative Cloud apps in future?

Reasoning behind is that with the CC subscription model customers will provide a continuous cash flow to Adobe, no matter if new features are introduced into the apps or not, whereas in the Creative Suite model Adobe was forced to develop new features interesting enough to motivate customers to upgrade to the new version.

In the CC model, what would stop Adobe from firing half the developers, thus slashing costs in half, when the cash flow is guaranteed anyway?

Just a thought.


----------



## cinema-dslr (May 23, 2013)

*Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - future development slowdown?*

excellent point.
With the "creative cloud" they elliminate one of the driving force behind new development as you describe.
They now only have to worry about the competition to bring new or better tools.

But they seem to think that on many fronts they are way ahead of the competition and it's now time to sit back and watch their bankacounts grow.


----------



## Stephen Melvin (May 23, 2013)

*Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - future development slowdown?*

Stoppage, as far as I'm concerned. I have no desire to rent my software. Fortunately, this appears to be happening around the same time that I feel I no longer need to upgrade my camera, as the Mk III does pretty much anything I need it to. "Last camera syndrome," Thom Hogan calls it.


----------



## cayenne (May 23, 2013)

*Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - future development slowdown?*



sulla said:


> Hi!
> 
> Just a thought that came to my mind, that has nothing to do with the cost for us consumers:
> 
> ...



I would pretty much assume this to be the case. They really have no incentive like they do with rolling out a 'new release'....at least the fire under them likely won't be lit so much since they'll be the only game in town, with constant rental $$'s coming in, and they pretty much have your files (psd) held hostage if you don't continue to pay them...


----------



## bitm2007 (May 23, 2013)

*Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - future development slowdown?*

Photoshop CS6 is a very comprehensive piece of software. I therefore wouldn't be surprised if Adobe were already finding it harder and harder to find new apps to add to each upgrade version of CS. The introduction of CC, is likely to ease the pressure on them in this regard.


----------



## unfocused (May 24, 2013)

*Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - future development slowdown?*

Well, given that so many people on this and other forums have acknowledged that they are several generations behind would indicate to me that Adobe has been having a hard time finding compelling new features to add for quite some time.

Frankly, I kind of welcomed the fact that they seemed to be slowing down. It was frustrating when they were going through their periods when they felt compelled to redesign the interface with each new version. 

Wouldn't it be funny if the whole Creative Cloud thing was just a scam to push people who are still using CS 1, 2, 3 etc., to finally upgrade to CS 6? Next May they could announce that they have "listened" to their customers and will be offering new permanent licenses, maybe on a delayed schedule (you can buy a permanent license for the Creative Cloud 2013 version beginning in Jan. 2015, etc.).

Just kidding of course.


----------



## dstppy (May 24, 2013)

*Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - future development slowdown?*

I think we're at the "MP3 argument" . . . see here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/09/03/bruce-willis-to-sue-apple-over-itunes/

More than anything else, we're dealing with eroding 'ownership' of the zeros and ones on our own machines.

That said, I know of a large number of people clinging to old (pre-CS) versions of Photoshop for the 'upgrade cost'.

I'm not a big fan of "the cloud"; it is something that isn't is as it is implemented, which is a clearly defined lie.

Honestly, the bottom line in the REAL software world is "free"; the returned revenue will come from genuine support . . . Adobe's not the farthest detached from that (I'm glaring at you, HP, and brandishing something rather pointy), but they're going that ways . . .

You're talking about a mouse with a really long nose. That is not the real "Elephant in the room", which is the ability to use something you paid for indefinitely. We don't live forever, but these companies act like we do and that is infringing upon their right to profit.

People think that editing crap on their iPhone is good . . . so maybe this will fix their faulty business models; probably not. 

Optimists enjoy optimism. Pessimists are prepared for reality. My outlook is particularly grim, having thought this over.

Hrm; that's a bad ending. We have "FoCal" and "Dx0" . . . so . . . maybe if the big boys fark stuff up enough the 'free market' will fix things, meaning that people that care about doing things right will actually give us an alternative and make some money along the way. I'm programming way too much and not taking enough pictures . . . that's the real problem. I'm taking my dadgum camera to work tomorrow to fix the problem


----------



## RGF (May 24, 2013)

*Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - future development slowdown?*



bitm2007 said:


> Photoshop CS6 is a very comprehensive piece of software. I therefore wouldn't be surprised if Adobe were already finding it harder and harder to find new apps to add to each upgrade version of CS. The introduction of CC, is likely to ease the pressure on them in this regard.



I think Abode will find many more enhancements - after all the cost barrier for competition is now much lower (new PS users will no longer have a sunk cost of $600+ in s/w)


----------



## RGF (May 24, 2013)

*Re: Ode to Adobe CC*



wickidwombat said:


> Oh Adobe how do I love thee,
> take my credit card for your monthly fee.
> My work ever more trapped in a bastion
> bound and shackled by your subscription.
> ...



New poet laureate of CR


----------



## cayenne (May 28, 2013)

*Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - future development slowdown?*



unfocused said:


> Well, given that so many people on this and other forums have acknowledged that they are several generations behind would indicate to me that Adobe has been having a hard time finding compelling new features to add for quite some time.
> 
> Frankly, I kind of welcomed the fact that they seemed to be slowing down. It was frustrating when they were going through their periods when they felt compelled to redesign the interface with each new version.
> 
> ...



Hey, maybe so....

I mean, remember way back when with the "new" coke debacle? They caused and uproar, and then brought coke "classic" back to us....

I always thought that was a bit of a publicity stunt...I might be wrong tho.


----------



## bitm2007 (Jun 7, 2013)

The "Eliminate the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model petition" now has over 29,500 supporters

https://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model


----------



## rpt (Jun 9, 2013)

bitm2007 said:


> The "Eliminate the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model petition" now has over 29,500 supporters
> 
> https://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model


Signed!


----------



## Click (Jun 9, 2013)

rpt said:


> Signed!



+1


----------



## Hannes (Jun 12, 2013)

I just checked what the CC would cost in Britain, £46.88/ month, that is $74. That is what I call a rip off

I was planning on buying CS6 while I'm a student but since they only sell the pricier extended version ( which I have no use for) and there are a number of improvements that are only available with the CC version I'm voting with my wallet. Besides, lightroom does nearly everything I need anyway


----------



## DianeK (Jun 13, 2013)

I think I am done with Adobe for now. 

I have LR4 and PhotoshopCS5.5. I was going to upgrade to PSCS6 on a perpetual licence before it disappeared but now I am stalled on that too. I don't like what I have been reading about the Manager that gets downloaded with it. 

Their release of LR5 is actually more buggy than the beta was...how's that for a slap in the face for the CC early adopters.

No, I figure if I can't make my images better with what I have now, then I need to become more focused on becoming a better photographer rather than a better PP'er. 

Maybe, _maybe_ I'll consider LR5 down the road (5.1, 5.2?) once they fix all the things they broke in it by rushing its release because I really like the looks of that radial gradient filter (I'm too lazy to get good with flash) and only if it continues to be a perpetual licence product because I do plan on upgrading my camera within the next 1-2 years. I have already learned how to live with the disconnect between ACR in LR and ACR in PS and my world still turns.

But for me that's the bottom line - stabilize LR5 and they'll get my $79 upgrade dollars. But no more PS for me.

Diane


----------



## agierke (Jun 13, 2013)

> The "Eliminate the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model petition" now has over 29,500 supporters
> 
> https://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model



signed


----------



## Mantadude (Jun 13, 2013)

bitm2007 said:


> The "Eliminate the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model petition" now has over 29,500 supporters
> 
> https://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model



Signed


----------



## bitm2007 (Jun 17, 2013)

According to Photo Rumors Adobe is considering a new $9.99, 3 year pricing model for Photoshop Creative Cloud

http://photorumors.com/2013/06/16/adobe-is-considering-new-pricing-models-for-creative-cloud/


----------



## cayenne (Jun 17, 2013)

bitm2007 said:


> According to Photo Rumors Adobe is considering a new $9.99, 3 year pricing model for Photoshop Creative Cloud
> 
> http://photorumors.com/2013/06/16/adobe-is-considering-new-pricing-models-for-creative-cloud/



I think the bottom line they still seem to be missing.

There are a LOT of people out there that do not want to _*RENT *_software, they'd rather purchase it and use it as long as they want, even un-attached to the internet.


----------



## Forceflow (Jun 18, 2013)

cayenne said:


> bitm2007 said:
> 
> 
> > According to Photo Rumors Adobe is considering a new $9.99, 3 year pricing model for Photoshop Creative Cloud
> ...



Totally agree, I do not ever want a subscription model no matter how little the cost in the beginning. (Because it will get more expensive once they've got everybody hooked) I want to buy the software and then use it for as long as I want.
I have CS6 now and unless there will be a non-cloud version coming out that will be my last PS version.


----------



## Harry Muff (Jun 18, 2013)

I have it and, apart from under the hood changes (it's definitely snappier), there really isn't much difference.


Shake Reduction filter? Hasn't amazed me so far.


The rest? nothing special to report.




The UI is identical to CS6.






Basically, the reason they don't want to sell this in a box for a lump sum, is that there really isn't enough there to justify it.


It's CS6 with a boost and a couple of new filters. 




Whoopee…




Buy CS6 and live happily ever after.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 18, 2013)

DianeK said:


> No, I figure if I can't make my images better with what I have now, then I need to become more focused on becoming a better photographer rather than a better PP'er.



I think there is a lot of wisdom in your words. It is supposed to be about photography.


----------



## thepancakeman (Jun 19, 2013)

AcutancePhotography said:


> DianeK said:
> 
> 
> > No, I figure if I can't make my images better with what I have now, then I need to become more focused on becoming a better photographer rather than a better PP'er.
> ...



I think that is a bit open to debate. Is a photographer synonymous with "camera operator" or is it the ability to create a final image? ???

Personally I kinda suck as a camera operator, but think I do a decent job of ending up with good photographs because I can see the end product and ultimately get there, even if I struggle to do it "in camera". And yes, I'm talking about stuff that could have been done in a darkroom, so the "that's not photography, that's graphic arts" argument doesn't really apply.


----------



## bitm2007 (Jun 22, 2013)

Harry Muff : Wrote



> Basically, the reason they don't want to sell this in a box for a lump sum, is that there really isn't enough there to justify it. It's CS6 with a boost and a couple of new filters. Whoopee… Buy CS6 and live happily ever after.,



My feelings exactly. Unless you absolutely need the latest version, I see no reason why CS6 licences should subscribe to CC. For me it would basically feel like paying a monthly subscription for software you already have.


----------



## eosphoros (Jun 23, 2013)

I just made my objections known with the [email protected] survey. So Adobe might care. I've been using Topaz with their new FXlab. The new release of Topaz Clarity is a great piece of software. 

Sourceforge has focusing algorithm. Anyone using it?


----------



## Harry Muff (Jun 26, 2013)




----------



## noisejammer (Jun 27, 2013)

My dog once pinched off a CC snow-cone... 


Harry Muff said:


>


----------



## eosphoros (Jul 1, 2013)

Free standalone shake reduction program SmartDeblur 2.1 (win) http://smartdeblur.net/ by Vladimir Yuzhikov. http://yuzhikov.com/projects.html
Waiting for the Lightroom 5 DVD.
TOPAZ Rulz with their perpetual FREE UPDATES. The new Topaz Clarity kicks ass. Their complete package is on sale for $199.


----------



## rpt (Aug 18, 2013)

The BBC has an interesting article. Take a look at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23714699. Will look at some of those softwares later today. I was also pleased to see Canon cameras and lenses in the pictures ther


----------

