New Adobe location option.. im against it.

[patricklavoie]

<p>I cant imagine having to *rent* my software all my life... i pay for them for every version out there if i feel for it ( in my case, Photoshop is always up to date) . They are mine.. not just a renting piece of software.<br>

<br />I dont know what Adobe is thinking doing so.. but according to more than 2000 complain on another site in less than 24hre.. i think im not alone.<br>

heres something you can sign, and maybe they will rethink to another solution ..</p>

<p>http://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model<br /><br /></p>

<p> </p>

[EricM]

<p>Thanks for the link, Patrick. But we never really owned it. For me though, it seems a few bucks a months is better that a huge hit every 18mnths. And it wont be long until most can make do on free software like Google + and Snapseed ect. And another reason I'm glad I stopped dng :)</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>by owned i mean it cost me 250$ once and i can decide to upgrade or not at any given moment IF i feel the need.. (i know you dont really owned the software if you read the EULA..)<br>

<br />But by asking to pay 20$ each month IF you want your software to work is non sense. Of course, you can simply just pay for a month .. dont pay for 3month, then repay another month and so on.. tahts good for part time user.. but for people who work with it i kind of feel like they screw me.<br>

<br />Understand that 20$/month if for 1 software only pay annually.. the whole suite is 50$/month base on a yearly contract.</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>.. and i must say taht for the whole suite if you need it, its kind of a good deal honestly.. at 600$ year.. but for Photoshop alone, a 250$ once for upgrade vs 240$/year.. each year is kind of absurd!.. of course, if you dont own the software at all .. 20$ a month is a good deal since it cost around 800$ to start.</p>

<p>Can they propose a better price for existing owner?... like 10$/month .. that will bring the price of a regular update vs a rent about the same price ; )</p>

[remco-jan.woldhuis]

Buying the full RTU as itis today is only relevant if you need Photoshop on a daily basis. If you only meed it every now

and then renting is a good option. And they have another valid argument against piracy.

[keith reeder]

<p>Already being discussed here:<br>

http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00bca5</p>

[JosvanEekelen]

<p>If you live in Europe you'll find that the prices are way higher here. Time to start looking for alternatives, just in case. BTW, Lightroom and Elements seem to be excluded from the subscription scheme, at least for the moment. </p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>Patrick, it's all explained starting on page 4 of this Adobe pdf:</p>

<p>http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/investor-relations/PDFs/ADBE_10K_FY12_FINAL_CERTIFIED.pdf</p>

<p>Read carefully what the words "we believe", "there are trends", etc. imply. This is there business model strategy to provide services globally for many intercommunication business and social network workflows using photos, video, animation, graphics, etc. that streamlines their distribution of their software. IOW photographers are but a small sector of their client base.</p>

<p>Here's my take: Page 4 of that pdf outlines in a way that makes it difficult to tell if Adobe "KNOWS" that this is the way things are working or if they are saying "THIS IS THE WAY" they are going to service it. All in all it looks like speculation because I don't get to see anyone actually working and using their products this way to know it's working as intended.</p>

<p>Read these myths about Cloud subscription integration:</p>

<p>http://prodesigntools.com/adobe-creative-cloud-myths.html</p>

<p>Read the comments section of on the linked page below on "Free tutorials" from the above myth link...</p>

<p>http://blogs.adobe.com/creativecloud/get-a-leg-up-creative-cloud-training-now-available/?PID=2159997</p>

<p>It shows some of the cracks of how this is suppose to work which may involve a lot of calls to "Customer Service" and we all know how well that pans out.</p>

<p>They're saying they have a lot of subscribers but they can't tell you how they're making it work for them. Time will tell if this way of working in eCommerce on a global scale is the best way to work.</p>

[s._prior]

<p>The new policy by Adobe hurts those that use the product regularly. The cost of renting is higher than owning it outright.<br>

According to Adobe, Lightroom will still be available as a user-owned product but there will also be a renting option that will have added features not available in the user-owned version. Go figure. In time I'm sure even lightroom will follow the Photoshop model.<br>

I hope Adobe know what they're doing as I can see lots of people migrating away from Adobe to other software.</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>Thanks Tim i will read that.. and yes S. its exactly what i think.. i already own Photoshop.. a upgarde for me cost 250$ for 2 years (before i upgrade again for another version) .. this new way will cost me 360$ a year (its 20$ a month now, but will go back to 30$/month after that) .. so basically it could cost me 720$ for 2 years.. non sense.</p>

<p>And for those that think that this will stop piracy.. Adobe said the same thing 10 years ago with CS1 when you needed to contact them online for registration.. it took less than a month to get a pirate to prove them wrong... </p>

<p>Im a heavy Photoshop user, 40hres + a week, 11 month a years ... for the past 13years... and yes i NEED to upgrade to the next version for multiple reason as a professional retoucher.</p>

<p> </p>

[jenkins]

<p>What about remote locations with no internet, or planes? This whole scheme is based around internet being available, sometimes it's not.</p>

[grh]

<p>Additional information has been made available.<br>

A year subscription for only PS will cost $10/month, or $120. A single-month rental will be $30 for a single product.<br>

It will require internet access to download and license the product to begin (e.g.) the 30 day period, but I don't believe that you must have a connection to the network every time you use it. The software is being distributed electronically, and installed locally, then activated over the network. If you have a network connection you'll be able to access updates immediately upon availability. But I can't imagine why one would need a constant network connection to run the program, especially if one is not storing files in the "cloud".<br>

That said, without compelling reason to access a new feature, it seems to me there's value in buying a current copy, installing and using it for as long as you need it. Rent the CC version when you need access to a new feature. Then let the rental expire. Stop presuming that you must have the latest, greatest thing just because someone tells you so. Figure out how to get by without them. Or if the new elements are that compelling, accept that they are going to cost.</p>

[AlanKlein]

<p>Much of the software industry is like this. AUtoCAd for architects and engineers, Windows for well most everyone. Wait until they figure out how to charge you for .pdf documents on the cloud or later when you want to read them back and you have to pay for the reader again. And never mind dng which is suppose to be free for eternity. Does anyone really believe that now? </p>

<p>Programs are set so you're locked in once you get started. It's like heroin. The pusher gives it free or cheap until you're hooked, then watch out. It's insidious throughout the industry. Everyone winks when the other guy does it than tries to figure out how they get a monopoly that keeps returning dividends for them too. With renting, the cash flow is constant. Why should Adobe wait until you upgrade? More and more software companies will jump onto this business model. </p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<blockquote>

<p>That said, without compelling reason to access a new feature, it seems to me there's value in buying a current copy, installing and using it for as long as you need it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You might want to forecast farther into the future going that route. Keep in mind your "creations" are not only being made with Adobe software but also on a machine and OS as well. What happens when your current blazing fast computer gets old and no longer works 5 years later. You'll have to find a similar system and OS version that will run that current copy of Adobe software that's now too old to run on newer computers.</p>

<p>Then if you do buy a new system after holding out that long you'll be forced to buy into the subscription plan. No telling what price you'll have to pay to Adobe for being gone so long. </p>

[grh]

<blockquote>

<p>You might want to forecast farther into the future going that route. Keep in mind your "creations" are not only being made with Adobe software but also on a machine and OS as well. What happens when your current blazing fast computer gets old and no longer works 5 years later. You'll have to find a similar system and OS version that will run that current copy of Adobe software that's now too old to run on newer computers.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, I don't own a blazing fast computer. In fact I prefer to no longer buy the first model year of anything. I use software several years old already, with the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" paradigm. Yeah, at some point that will stop being an option, but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.<br>

Granted that no consumer OS enables binary compatibility the way an enterprise class OS can, but lots of old binaries still run under Windoze 7 and 8.<br>

If the early adopters that simply <em>must</em> have the newest, shiniest thing want to jump on board Adobe CC, more power to them. I've spent the last several days trying to decide if there's any value in my, as a photographer, moving to CS5 or CS6 while I can. And so far, the answer is "no". CS3 does everything I, as a photographer, need. A graphic artist is probably going to have a different take on that, but me? I'm good. And expect to remain so for at least 5-7 years.<br>

And FWIW, CS3 runs under Windows 8, so that gives me even more life. Although I still like XP.</p>

[EricM]

<p><strong>"Keep in mind your "creations" are not only being made with Adobe software but also on a machine and OS as well. What happens when your current blazing fast computer gets old and no longer works 5 years later. You'll have to find a similar system and OS version that will run that current copy of Adobe software that's now too old to run on newer computers."</strong></p>

<p>I can open my tiff files from 1997 on many OS's and software. I just stay away from dng and psd.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>Perhaps the new model is also a means of controlling piracy? </p>

[User_6502147]

<p>Adobe will be cleaning up with various educ institutions...we're talking easily 5-6 digits. I'm optimistic that someone will come up with an alternative. So far Lightroom is not part of this mess, but who knows what coming down the pike. Pirating ? It will be a difficult choice for some...depending on the need. I'll stick to Elements and CNX2.</p>

<p>Les</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>I didn't say open a tiff file, Eric, in that quote.</p>

<p>I'm talking about relying on editing legacy and new Raw files AND other content (vector graphics/video) "creations" with old software that may not run on newer computers and OS.</p>

[mattb1]

I signed up a year a go, if I take into account each product I use it is actually not too bad of a deal.. I use PS, Lightroom,

and dream weaver. But, now I can use all of their products. If i were to upgrade each on a two year cycle, which I was

doing , then CC is still more expensive. But, now I am more current and do not misout on the new tools. So, It kind of

works out for me because I can now use the products that I could not afford before.

 

Sure, had a couple of hiccups with signing on to CC but have not had to call customer service yet. Of course, I am not a

pro who depends on CC every day. So, take it in the light that I am a casual user.

 

I understand the issue, it is nice to know that you own a copy. And, it is a financial burden to stay current. I hope Adobe

makes allowances for those of us who can not make that large of a financial commitment. For those that can I would say

take a look at your upgrade history and see if it makes sense to subscribe.

 

Still, we need to complain until Adobe takes care of everyone.

[ted_marcus1]

<p><em>Still, we need to complain until Adobe takes care of everyone.</em><br>

That won't do any good. The MBA-geniuses who designed the new business model surely have already taken those complaints into account. They surely knew that some current customers would not accept it. They crunched the numbers and decided that the benefit (to Adobe) of a perpetual monthly revenue stream from captive professionals who couldn't do without Adobe products would greatly outweigh any ill-will and loss of business from everyone else. Like any corporation, Adobe exists to increase the wealth of its executives and shareholders. And if the MBA-geniuses are right, this new way of doing business will further that goal.</p>

<p>They've repositioned Photoshop and other high-end software for a specific market to maximize revenue and profit. Most of us are outside that market, so they don't care about our complaints. Sure, they'd like us to remain loyal Adobe customers who use Lightroom and Elements, the products intended for our market. But there are several alternatives, so they can't get away with forcing us into their rental model. </p>

<p>The energy spent on fruitless complaints would be better spent urging other companies to seize the opportunity and come up with serious competition to Photoshop. Or else, if you have the skills, join the Open Source community and expand The GIMP to add missing features that would make it a free alternative to Photoshop. If any of that happens, the MBA-geniuses will be forced to listen to the complaints they now feel confident about ignoring. </p>

 

[keith reeder]

<blockquote>

<p>Still, we need to complain until Adobe takes care of everyone.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>They are taking care of everyone - Lr will continue to be available stand-alone.</p>

<p>Now this might mean that some people need to revise their workflow if they're currently using (say) a completely Bridge/ACR/Photoshop workflow, or currently have a synced Lr/Photoshop workflow, but the fact remains that there's a way ahead that doesn't involve CC: current/updated stand-alone Lightroom and a pre CC stand-alone Photoshop. </p>

[howard_owen]

<blockquote>

<p>What happens when your current blazing fast computer gets old and no longer works 5 years later. You'll have to find a similar system and OS version that will run that current copy of Adobe software that's now too old to run on newer computers.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Photoshop 6.01 (that's pre-CS for all you kiddies out there) runs on Windows 8-64 w/32GB of RAM.<br /> <img src="http://www.pbase.com/ho72/image/150150786/original.jpg" alt="" /> <br /> I'm not seeing a problem. :)</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>Keep in mind your "creations" are not only being made with Adobe software but also on a machine and OS as well. What happens when your current blazing fast computer gets old and no longer works 5 years later.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is a reality we all need to focus on and consider. A lot of users are now looking at Adobe specifically and not other companies that require us to accept terms to use their tools. If you make your living with these tools, you hardly have much choice and a smart business person will be able to deal with this on going reality. Some must have the latest hardware which means the latest OS which means the latest Adobe tool. For those outside that group, the decisions are more difficult. You <strong>can</strong> move back from CC to CS6 easily and probably a couple versions earlier if you play your cards right. Basically avoid new functionality as a Smart Object, some Type & the Rounded Rectangle. You'll <strong>never</strong> get back the ability to edit the CC technology outside of that subscription. The day you started editing images in Photoshop, you started a proprietary editing process. Nothing stops you from saving a TIFF and moving on. </p>

[howard_owen]

<p>Let's face it, Adobe is out of ideas compelling enough to make users fork over upgrade cash with each new release. That's why they wanted to do away with the "3 versions back" upgrade policy and that's why they're moving to the cloud. The cloud model gives them a constant cash flow without the bother of having to entice the user with anything new that's really significant.<br /><br />What have we received in the last few releases that really mattered? Puppet warp? I'll give you Smart Objects as a workflow-shifter, but it was hardly a critical, can't do without feature. The vanishing point tool was an interesting addition, but I've used it maybe three times so, for me, it doesn't qualify as essential either. There may be other gee-whiz stuff in the Extended versions, but I don't do Extended because, from my perspective, there was no reason, no selling point.<br /><br />Adobe has fixed that now though. You'll get all the Extended funtions and more whether you want them or not.<br /><br />The cloud will bring us all sorts of things that we never knew we needed as well as as few minor changes to old tools and a new toy or two. I set my type in a layout app, so paragraph and type styles don't matter. Rounded rectangles... why? The new deblur tool will probably work about as well as the content aware functions do. And so on.<br /><br />Doubtless that there will be some good stuff coming down the road, assuming Adobe stays in business. Whether they do or don't, at this point, no longer matters to me.</p>