p.11 #1 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
anthonygh wrote:
I wonder what percentage of CS6 most photographers actually use...and if the programme was slimmed down to the basic core what would it look like? Something like LR4 probably...or something that other companies are either producing already or could with a little effort - particularly if they see a whole new market sector open up (disgruntled Adobe customers).
I think the software you are talking about is called photoshop elements....
p.11 #2 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
Well, I added my own comments and suggestions to Mr. Nack's blog page. We'll see if they are actually reading the stuff.
Short of it: I don't expect Adobe to do an about-face and say, "Oops, now THAT wasn't a good idea, let's scrap it". They're on the path, and they're not going to back up. But they can tweak it before they get too far along with it, and that's what I hope they do.
My suggestion was that they don't have the $9.99 per month Photoshop CS pricing just as a first year promotion - that they keep that price full time for those who sign up, and ditch the one year "contract" you have to agree to in order to get it as well. People can opt out or lapse if they need to, and reconnect to the service at the same price within a reasonable time frame if they need to. A second idea was that they beef up Photoshop Elements to appeal to a slightly more semi-pro/pro crowd, continue to sell it as a DVD/box set, and create a new product just geared toward the everyday consumer to replace where Elements is now - perhaps a "Photoshop Basics", for the everyday person who has ZERO pro photo interests? Of course, the best option would be to just start selling PS CS upgrades on disk again, but as said, I don't see them backtracking on that.
I'm not going to rush out to buy Lightroom or take advantage of the limited time to still be able to buy CS6, though. I can survive using Corel's Paint Shop Pro and my Topaz plugins work fine on it. I PREFER Adobe, but I also prefer to use software from companies that at least act like they want and appreciate me as a customer. Right now I'm not feeling that from Adobe, so if other options don't become available from them, I'll join the list of those who don't come back.
p.11 #3 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
I think the subscription model might work for some commercial users who need access to the entire creative suite without the initial heavy investment of buying a license for the entire suite. But the negatives of the system far outweigh the positives, and a few issues other than the most obvious flaws that people have cited in Adobe's proposed system are, in my opinion:
1. Since Adobe can push out updates anytime they want without giving the users the option to stick with a tried and tested previous version, commercial users may get stuck working with software that does not work as intended. If Adobe pushes an update that breaks or cripples the software on your machine, and it takes them a few days to fix the bug(s), you may not have use of your software in that period with no option to roll back to a previous stable version without jumping through hoops. Is Adobe going to reimburse customers for any losses they might incur in such a scenario?
2. For amateurs who don't make money using Adobe products but buy Adobe software to pursue their hobbies, the cost of being a dilettante just doubled. The cost is higher even if you a student or educator eligible for discounted pricing. This is unfair, and poor long term business strategy, since Adobe just singled out a significant portion of their customer base and told them they (Adobe) are not interested in your business.
3. A higher priced model might make some sense if Adobe were to offer some sort of tiered service contract as part of the plan. Pay $50 a month for the entire CC suite and you will get unlimited technical support, pay $30 a month and you get one free support call a month, or pay $24 for no support. Adobe has doubled prices but has offered NOTHING in return.
I am an amateur and not a heavy PS user. I have owned PS since CS4 and upgarded to CS5 and CS6 as they were introduced, not because I needed to, but because it was available at a fair price. I am not willing to pay $240 for a locked in year long contract for software I might use for 8 to 10 hours each month, especially when my subscription offers me little in the way of technical assistance/service. I will be hanging on to CS6 for a few years until other options become viable. I don't make a dime from photography, and irrespective of whether I can afford $240/year for a license, I am not willing to spend that money on a product I will never own.
p.11 #4 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
aubsxc wrote:
1. Since Adobe can push out updates anytime they want without giving the users the option to stick with a tried and tested previous version, commercial users may get stuck working with software that does not work as intended. If Adobe pushes an update that breaks or cripples the software on your machine, and it takes them a few days to fix the bug(s), you may not have use of your software in that period with no option to roll back to a previous stable version without jumping through hoops. Is Adobe going to reimburse customers for any losses they might incur in such a scenario? ...Show more →
Updates are not forced; that's internet hysteria. Users have to explicitly accept them. You can choose to ignore the update and keep on keeping on with the version you're running.
But this is among my concerns as a working photographer. To get the benefits of that cash outlay and the continuous improvements, I have to opt to install the updates as they come down the pike. If it were any company other than Adobe, I'd probably jump at it... but they don't have the best record of quality assurance practices, especially over the past several versions, and especially since the Macromedia acquisition. (Which, given the quality of Macromedia's engineering, shouldn't be terribly surprising when you then stuff those people into Adobe product teams.)
So what's the benefit of continuous improvement when I have to wait until I'm doing nothing to install an update and make sure it actually works?
Kelby sure likes the sound of his own voice. And it takes him 10 minutes to make a point that would take anyone else 20 seconds. Are his training videos as bad?
p.11 #6 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
colinm wrote: Updates are not forced; that's internet hysteria. Users have to explicitly accept them. You can choose to ignore the update and keep on keeping on with the version you're running.
11.4 The Software may automatically download and install updates from Adobe. These updates are designed to improve, enhance and further develop the Services and may take the form of bug fixes, enhanced functions, new Software modules, and completely new versions. You agree to receive such updates (and permit Adobe to deliver these to you with or without your knowledge) as part of your use of the Services.
Can you tell us how you interpret Section 11.4, especially the part about "and permit Adobe to deliver these to you with or without your knowledge"?
p.11 #8 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
aubsxc wrote:
Can you tell us how you interpret Section 11.4, especially the part about "and permit Adobe to deliver these to you with or without your knowledge"?
Butt covering.
That term has been in there since Creative Cloud launched. Creative Cloud has not yet had mandatory updates in over a year of operation, and Adobe has already stated (as have John Nack, Jeffrey Tranberry, and several other team leads and employees) updates will not be mandatory.
If Adobe discovered tomorrow that Photoshop CC had some gaping critical security hole that allowed remote access, sure, they might force an update. (Heck, I'd hope they would.) But shoving every update down your throat is not the intended behavior of the service, nor the historical behavior of the service, and at some point you can only take Adobe at their word and their past actions.
Edit: And to take that term to an even more logical endpoint, the license manager is "Adobe software." The application manager is "Adobe software." You can update those things until the cows come home to fix bugs, add features, close security holes, and offer new licensing models without ever affecting a user's actual applications.
p.11 #9 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
Photoshop has always been outrageously high priced.
But who in their right mind would pay full price for it? I certainly didn't. I have two Photoshop licenses, one for the Mac and one for Windows. I paid $40 for Elements and then received a special discount to upgrade to CS5 from Adobe for $299 for the Mac license (total cost for CS5: $349). I paid $250 for the PC license (from Adorama) during the blowout sales of last fall.
p.11 #10 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
BluesWest wrote:
But who in their right mind would pay full price for it? I certainly didn't. I have two Photoshop licenses, one for the Mac and one for Windows. I paid $40 for Elements and then received a special discount to upgrade to CS5 from Adobe for $299 for the Mac license (total cost for CS5: $349). I paid $250 for the PC license (from Adorama) during the blowout sales of last fall.
p.11 #11 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
tived wrote:
You have always rented software, if you have paid for it! You have just paid in a lump sum payment. You have never own the software only the right to use it.
Henrik
Paid up licenses are generally perpetual (with some exceptions). Let's not insult anyone's intelligence by pretending that a perpetual use license is the same as making perpetual payments for access.
People aren't incensed because they can't pay; people are annoyed because something they used to be able to pay for up-front and use at their discretion is now controlled by Adobe forever. I question whether taking this control away from users will benefit them, though the benefits to Adobe's shareholders are clear (at least in the short term).
The CC model creates disincentives for Adobe to innovate. If Adobe can convince users like yourself to become prisoners because you can always "sell another photo" to pay the monthly fee, they have very little reason to add new features or improve existing ones. After all, if you don't pay Adobe, you lose access to the software.
p.11 #12 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
I was discussing this earlier 'down the pub' with an amateur photographer who has bought boxed copies of PS in the past. He won't rent the next upgrade if he needs one...he is going to look at alternatives including PirateBay.
I wonder how many others are thinking along those lines?
p.11 #15 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
anthonygh wrote:
I was discussing this earlier 'down the pub' with an amateur photographer who has bought boxed copies of PS in the past. He won't rent the next upgrade if he needs one...he is going to look at alternatives including PirateBay.
I wonder how many others are thinking along those lines?
A few i think, but not so many - Photoshop is already so expensive that people who don't want to pay are already using unlicensed copies. In reality, i think Adobe will accede to some of the easier demands (access to files after licence expiry etc.) and most of the folk complaining about the change will eventually accept it and pay for the CC subscription model.
p.11 #16 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
15Bit wrote:
A few i think, but not so many - Photoshop is already so expensive that people who don't want to pay are already using unlicensed copies. In reality, i think Adobe will accede to some of the easier demands (access to files after licence expiry etc.) and most of the folk complaining about the change will eventually accept it and pay for the CC subscription model.
Disagree strongly.
It's not that I can't afford Photoshop - it's that I refuse to go down this road, and I'm far from alone.
There are alternatives and I'll use them. It's been a good many years with Photoshop and more versions than I can count, but no more, no matter what token changes they accede to. Bullies don't stop until you stand up to them.
p.11 #17 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
silvershoes wrote:
It's not that I can't afford Photoshop - it's that I refuse to go down this road, and I'm far from alone.
There are alternatives and I'll use them. It's been a good many years with Photoshop and more versions than I can count, but no more, no matter what token changes they accede to. Bullies don't stop until you stand up to them.
I agree.
Some might think that calling Adobe a "bully" is overly dramatic, but in a sense that word fits correctly, as they are basically coming up to us saying, "Do this, or else". No choices, very little in the way of a warning, just "do it".
We should not be naive to think that other companies are not watching this play out with extreme interest right now. Microsoft is testing the water with the subscription based Office... Intuit is rumored to be thinking of making Quickbooks subscription-only, etc .. the list will grow... if Adobe does this and there is little resistance or repercussions from their doing it. I'm not living in poverty - I do enough paid work that I could afford the subscription model - I just don't like the fine print or the "or else" part of it. There is nothing wrong with a subscription service to software as for some, it fits their needs. But the choice to buy software should not be eliminated for those that the subscription format does not fit their needs.
Personally, I would have been fine if they had just upped the price of updates from $199 to $249, and/or allowed people to continue to buy the software but charge $29 for "update modules" where you pay for the individual updates you want (similar to plug-ins). There may have caused grumbles, but not disgust.
I posted this once before but will do so again - while this new format will create a more steady stream of revenue coming in for Adobe, it really will on some measurable level actually help their competitors, too. Corel stands to benefit from it the most: http://coreldraw.com/blogs/gerard/archive/2013/05/08/corel-is-all-about-giving-users-choice.aspx . I talked to someone from Corel Friday and they said in light of these recent Adobe announcements, they plan on making, "Some very welcome upgrades" to Paint Shop Pro, and she said they will be reaching out to Adobe customers even more with incentives to try/switch to their products.
p.11 #18 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
It seems Adobe has targeted commercial users and is ignoring hobby photographers. Though we purchased PS previously we will now have to pay for it again in subscription fee.
I wonder how Adobe determined prices - what they assumed for lifetime of a subscriber. Bet it is fairly short, 3 -5 years. If you can avoid capital outlay for the software and pay only month fee, the economics may not be so bad.
however if you already have the software and only occasional upgrade, the economics are really really unfavorable.
p.11 #19 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
Those days are over John.
Agreed, but the point I was trying to make (badly, it appears) is that many people are claiming that the new subscription model for PS is not much more expensive than buying a perpetual license. Those people are ignoring the fact that the perpetual license was often heavily discounted (and I'm not talking about the academic version - I'm referring to the full, commercial version). Subscribing to PS will now cost $240 the first year, $480 the second year, and who knows what in the years after that. My Windows license for PS CS6 cost $250, and I can use it forever without giving Adobe one more penny.
p.11 #20 · Adobe Photoshop & Creative Suite Subscription-only!
Adobe's decision to force customers to their subscription services sucks big time. I am moving to Aperture from Apple. So far i used Lightroom, but not any more.
)