Personally, I think the whole issue is ridicules. We're talking about software here, not a cure for cancer. Use Adobe or not, their business plan will succeed or fail regardless of the opinions expressed on the various photo forums.
Dude, this is big business... both on the seller and the buyer's side. Remember New Coke? And that was just sugar water.
grahamb3 wrote:
I've been a user of adobe products since PS 2.5 (the first version for windows), so I'm well aware of Adobe.
I rarely make decisions based on public opinion, and almost never from opinions from anonymous members of public forums. Personally, I think there's some very silly comments made, but everyone's entitled to their own opinion (but not their own facts). The sum of all the negative opinions on all the photo forums I've read lately, plus the online petition against Adobe's subscription plan combined I guess would total about 1-2% of Adobe's paying CC subscribers.
What I don't like to see is the patronizing comments from the anti-Adobe element. Because someone else sees value in a product you don't doesn't make them "half-awake". Personally, I think the whole issue is ridicules. We're talking about software here, not a cure for cancer. Use Adobe or not, their business plan will succeed or fail regardless of the opinions expressed on the various photo forums....Show more →
This comment just doesn't make much sense to me. Sure, there are lots of people who go overboard in their comments, but there is a real issue here, and it isn't just cloud vs. perpetual license system, or single payment vs. monthly payments. The information is all here. I can hardly believe that in the face of the facts about the situation, you are still talking about whether the software is good or not. This is not about the merits of the software. The contractual rights grabs are deeply disturbing, and I presume that you are not aware of it, which is why I called you half-awake. There is so much more going on here than a few bucks.
I also don't see how Adobe will succeed if their customers revolt. Adobe is only as successful as their customers are loyal.
Thanks. They have hidden it well. I tried for a long time to find a link on the norwegian site, and also searched for CS6 Photoshop. The links in the search results had been changed and redirected to CC.
In the link you provided, Photoshop doesn't show. When I go to page 2, it doesn't show there either. But when I go back from page 2 to page 1, it appears on page 1. I tried that again and the same thing happened.
alundeb wrote:
They have removed it already. Somebody said you could upgrade until may 14, I was too late, money saved.
That's just the upgrade from an earlier version and was stated in a Macintouch forum (an Adobe rep told this to a customer). This does not affect availability of CS6 overall, just the ability for a cheaper upgrade path from an earlier version.
carstenw wrote:
This is not about the merits of the software. The contractual rights grabs are deeply disturbing, and I presume that you are not aware of it, which is why I called you half-awake. There is so much more going on here than a few bucks.
Yeah, what is going on is that CS, which is expensive software primarily being used by people who make money using the software, is now going to be sold with a licensing agreement the same as nearly every other piece of expensive software that people use to make money.
I could be rude and call you "half-awake" or "clueless" for not understanding that for the past ten to fifteen years all software with a primarily professional user base is being sold with annual licenses. In fact every piece of software I've used in my profession since the mid-nineties (so that would be going on twenty years now) has been sold with a license just like Adobe is now going to use for CS/CC.
Every modern lens you own was designed with software licensed this way. Every modern camera you own contains electronics and mechanicals designed with software licensed this way.
Now, is it good for non-professional users the Adobe changed their licensing model? Seems pretty clear to me it isn't. Is it good for professional users that they did? Less clear, but based on the reaction on the web it certainly seems a lot of professional photographers think it isn't. Is it a good business move on Adobe's part? That remains to be seen, but sure seems like they are garnering a whole lot of ill will here.
Does it rise to the level of calling Adobe evil money grubbing thieves? Well, it seems to be in vogue and socially acceptable to rail against most any corporation for most any reason. Clearly people are pissed off and directing the anger at Adobe seems the most appropriate course.
Is it appropriate to call other people on this forum "half-awake" or "clueless" or "shills"? No it isn't. And as demonstrated above others could throw the same words back at you and others posting on this board who seem to have less professional experience with software and its common licensing terms.
Make noise at and about Adobe. Don't give them your money if you are pissed off. By all means do your best to convince other people not to - politely. But watch your attitude and your name calling with other people on this board that have different experiences and opinions than you do.
Anyone confirm the upgrade may really be unavailable soon? Seems that Adobe would be fine taking a rush of $200 fees. They got mine. It was harder to find the link through all the cloud cover though. Given the learning curve with new software, replacements for the plug-ins/actions, whatever the philosphical objections, it cost me less in time/effort for now at least. I sometimes use DXO or DPP but still often have to export a tiff to PS for fine tuning.
rattymouse wrote:
I'm a big fan of LR. I use it practically every day. I buy upgrades on day 1 and was planning to do so for LR5. But now I'm not and it is because of Adobe's brazen cash grab with Photoshop. If they are not stopped now, if they are not sent a message now, then when? If CC is successful, moving LR to the cloud is only a matter of time. When, not if. If CC fails and perpetual licenses are brought back, then pausing to buy LR5 will look like a pretty smart move.
I guess you need to decide who you are actually hurting the most, Adobe not getting you $79 or you not getting the advancements in LR5. I know what I'm going to do and it is what is right for me...upgrade to LR5.
carstenw wrote:
This comment just doesn't make much sense to me. Sure, there are lots of people who go overboard in their comments, but there is a real issue here, and it isn't just cloud vs. perpetual license system, or single payment vs. monthly payments. The information is all here. I can hardly believe that in the face of the facts about the situation, you are still talking about whether the software is good or not. This is not about the merits of the software. The contractual rights grabs are deeply disturbing, and I presume that you are not aware of it, which is why I called you half-awake. There is so much more going on here than a few bucks.
I also don't see how Adobe will succeed if their customers revolt. Adobe is only as successful as their customers are loyal....Show more →
But how much of their customer base is actually revolting. I see some excitement from few people on forums, but how much of these few forums make up the customer base? I feel their largest base is from commercial firms which haven hundreds if not thousands of licenses, not the independent photography hobbyists.
kwalsh wrote:
Yeah, what is going on is that CS, which is expensive software primarily being used by people who make money using the software, is now going to be sold with a licensing agreement the same as nearly every other piece of expensive software that people use to make money.
I could be rude and call you "half-awake" or "clueless" for not understanding that for the past ten to fifteen years all software with a primarily professional user base is being sold with annual licenses. In fact every piece of software I've used in my profession since the mid-nineties (so that would be going on twenty years now) has been sold with a license just like Adobe is now going to use for CS/CC.
You are very mistaken. What has been common for businesses up until recently is the purchase of a perpetual license for a particular version of software and then annual purchases of maintenance for that software that, depending on the licensing terms, may include just patches or both patches and rights to new versions.
If a business stops paying the maintenance, it loses rights to patches and/or version upgrades BUT IT CAN STILL CONTINUE TO USE THE SOFTWARE. I run into corporate clients all the time that are using business software and haven't paid maintenance in years. It is a risk for them but it happens all the time.
What Adobe is doing with the Creative Cloud and what Microsoft is doing with Office 365 is essentially convert software to a service. In fact, this model is commonly referred to these days as "SAAS" (Software As A Service). With this model, YOU CANNOT USE THE SOFTWARE ONCE YOU STOP PAYING.
This model can make sense for a business in some scenarios but what makes sense for a large business does not necessarily make sense for a small business or individual. Here are some things to consider:
- It may be necessary for a business to keep up-to-date with critical software due to market reasons or to make sure it always has maintenance/bug-fix support for the software. In these cases, there is not much difference between paying for a perpetual license plus maintenance and paying an on-going service fee. If the software upgrades are not critical and the bug-fixes are minor, however, then the business case is less clear.
- A large business with thousands of seats of SAAS can make a BIG stink with the software/service provider and get some type of response without cancelling the service. The response may take the form of significant discounts on future payments/products or special consulting/support. A small business or individual does not have that clout, however, so the only way to send a significant message to the software developer in that case (without incurring migration and re-training costs), is to skip upgrade purchases. This is the option that small businesses and individuals have lost with the Creative Cloud.
Eyeball wrote:
You are very mistaken. What has been common for businesses up until recently is the purchase of a perpetual license for a particular version of software and then annual purchases of maintenance for that software that, depending on the licensing terms, may include just patches or both patches and rights to new versions.
If a business stops paying the maintenance, it loses rights to patches and/or version upgrades BUT IT CAN STILL CONTINUE TO USE THE SOFTWARE. I run into corporate clients all the time that are using business software and haven't paid maintenance in years. It is a risk for them but it happens all the time. ...Show more →
Sorry, no. The software I was talking about - engineering software - does not have perpetual licenses.
Matlab
Xilinx
Altera
Synpify
Modelsim
Autodesk
...many many others.
You are correct, some software charges for maintenance updates past a certain period. This is similar to the old CS model - you get updates for a period of time (time not specified, but instead by major revision) for free and then no more, but you still have a perpetual license to the software.
But many engineering and design packages are annual subscription only, exactly as Adobe is implementing now.
Is it a good fit for the Adobe customer base? Good question (EDIT: and based on this thread one would have to say it is a horrible fit for the part of the customer base on this forum).
Is it something dramatically new in the software world? Absolutely not, been done for decades in engineering design.
kwalsh wrote:
Sorry, no. The software I was talking about - engineering software - does not have perpetual licenses.
Matlab
Xilinx
Altera
Synpify
Modelsim
Autodesk
...many many others.
You are correct, some software charges for maintenance updates past a certain period. This is similar to the old CS model - you get updates for a period of time (time not specified, but instead by major revision) for free and then no more, but you still have a perpetual license to the software.
But many engineering and design packages are annual subscription only, exactly as Adobe is implementing now.
Is it a good fit for the Adobe customer base? Good question (EDIT: and based on this thread one would have to say it is a horrible fit for the part of the customer base on this forum).
Is it something dramatically new in the software world? Absolutely not, been done for decades in engineering design.
Actually Matlab does provide perpetual licenses with a software maintenance option (which you can even buy back into if you let it lapse), but you're right that many specialized engineering and academic software companies have been operating on the subscription model for a long time, even going as far as requiring hardware keys and other nonsense. Statistical software companies (SAS, SPSS, etc) have been doing that since I was in grad school in the '80's. It sucked then, and it sucks now.
That also explains the massive popularity of Python, R (open source derivative of S-Plus), etc. in academic circles, and I suspect GIMP will be getting a very close look now too.
