Adobe no longer has incentive to keep introducing new, cool features at a breakneck rate
This is where the discussions about the CC lose me. Exactly what "new, cool features" do you think are going to be added to future versions of Photoshop? It's been a mature product for at least the last two or three versions (and some people are perfectly happy and productive using versions even older than that).
This, in fact, is exactly the reason that Adobe has gone to a subscription model: there is nothing they can add to Photoshop (or, quite frankly, to their other programs) that will compel most perpetual license owners to pay for an upgrade. I realize that others have stated this point, but it bears repeating because it represents the foundation of Adobe's business decision to convert their customers from buyers to renters.
Since this news broke I have had a good look at what I use and what I might need in the future...and basically.....I'm happy with what I have....and will be for a very long time I think.
Current Adobe products are more than enough for my needs...and realistically, I don't know enough to get the most from them anyway. If I improved my Photoshopping skills that would be worth a whole upgrade or two anyway...and I suspect I am not alone in this.
Leaving aside my G1X (my last purchase)....I mainly use film or a 5D. I scan film and the software I have allows me do do stuff with film I could never have achieved in a darkroom...so happy there as well.
I have some interdependent software (not Adobe) that also suits me.
So unless still photography, gear and software moves in a direction I can't even envisage at the moment...I will be a happy snapper for many years to come.
I’ve used Capture One for years and only use Photoshop for tweaking the Tiff files and converting to jpeg. I see no need to join the cloud or even update to CS6, CS5 serves my needs. Capture One Pro 7 does a much better job of RAW conversions. I have Lightroom 4.4 but seldom use it because of their data base system. If it was possible to use Bridge with Lightroom I might consider working with it more.
It’s going to be interesting to see how the power plays work for both Adobe and the “one size fits all” Windows 8, although I see Microsoft is starting to soften their stance a bit. The “you will conform” attitude rubs me the wrong way but thankfully there are and will be alternatives.
BluesWest wrote:
Exactly what "new, cool features" do you think are going to be added to future versions of Photoshop?...
...there is nothing they can add to Photoshop (or, quite frankly, to their other programs) that will compel most perpetual license owners to pay for an upgrade...
John
Agreed. They are running out of ideas as are other major software producers.
Adobe is not alone in using the cloud to boost revenue and relieve the incessant need to produce upgrades, but they are taking it to a whole new level.
This is a test case, a trial of marketing strategem in the court of consumer will.
We will keep our old LR4 and CS-6 and wait until another company develops a replacement
product. With a World Economy and millions of software developers out there, it will
happen. I sincerely hope the stock prices of Adobe continue to Fall, this will send a
strong message to the bean counters that are apparently running Adobe and other
software companies. We want to purchase a software product, Not rent it !
BluesWest wrote:
This is where the discussions about the CC lose me. Exactly what "new, cool features" do you think are going to be added to future versions of Photoshop? It's been a mature product for at least the last two or three versions (and some people are perfectly happy and productive using versions even older than that).
This, in fact, is exactly the reason that Adobe has gone to a subscription model: there is nothing they can add to Photoshop (or, quite frankly, to their other programs) that will compel most perpetual license owners to pay for an upgrade. I realize that others have stated this point, but it bears repeating because it represents the foundation of Adobe's business decision to convert their customers from buyers to renters.
You really believe that? Photoshop cannot evolve further? Intel can't make a better chip? Canon/Nikon/Sony (etc.) can't improve on their product? End of the line. Stagnation, decay? Adobe is in their death throes so their going to subscription?
I'll be sticking with CS6 as long as I can. I have never pirated software before, but after Adobe's decision to rent their software, I honestly can't rule it out.
CC has been out a good long while now and has not been cracked. I'm not saying it can't be done but I don't think its nearly as easy as many people think. CS6 will have to serve you a good long time it still pretty darn good after all.
WAYCOOL wrote:
CC has been out a good long while now and has not been cracked. I'm not saying it can't be done but I don't think its nearly as easy as many people think. CS6 will have to serve you a good long time it still pretty darn good after all.
While this is true, perhaps the hackers have been cracking the CS6 perpetual license versions instead. While ever cracked versions of the latest (CS6) versions are around there is no need to crack CC.
However, once CS6 becomes out of date they will inevitably focus their efforts on the latest versions, which will mean CC.
Is it trivial? I don't know. It's it doable? I would think so. There are some very talented hackers out there who do it for the pride and enjoyment, not for the money.
However, my biggest fear with using hacked products is that having hacked them to remove copy protection and/or subscription systems, what other (malicious) systems could they have installed instead, like key loggers and other such systems. There are plenty of talented hackers who crack software for exactly this reason.
Apart from the ethical problems (why is the main reason I pay for the software I use) there are these obvious security problems which would scare the hell out of me. So I'll be sticking with official software, even if it's down rev.
Dave_EP wrote:
Apart from the ethical problems (why is the main reason I pay for the software I use) there are these obvious security problems which would scare the hell out of me.
There's also the pesky problem that pirating software is illegal.
I'm not participating in the CC. There's too big a price difference for me between subscribing every month for about $20 p/m (this year, who knows what it will be next year or the year after that) to upgrading every couple years for $199 as I've been doing since PS5.5. CS5 actually does all I need to do but yesterday I upgraded from CS5 to CS6 figuring it was probably a good idea to have the latest version of CS that could be purchased. I wanted a disc but the agent said they don't offer the upgrade in a disc though I know of one person who said he got his in disc. But there was no point in arguing.
I would be interested in short circuiting (my legally purchased but not yet installed) CS6's activation though. It was a simple matter of editing the Hosts file in earlier versions but I read that no longer works.
Dave_EP wrote:
That was kind of implied by the ethical bit, but yes, it's illegal
A significant difference lies in what happens in the event of a violation. If you break an ethical code, you may find your peers disapprove, or face disciplinary action if a professional body is involved. Break the law, however, and I don't have to list the possible penalties.
DanBrown wrote:
A significant difference lies in what happens in the event of a violation. If you break an ethical code, you may find your peers disapprove, or face disciplinary action if a professional body is involved. Break the law, however, and I don't have to list the possible penalties.
Correct.
Of course, my 'ethics' and that of many others are not to break the law in the first place, since that is in itself unethical
CS6 could be around for a long time. Third party developers can keep it current with new features as addons. This as long as we don't see operating systems and hardware going to 128-bit processing or something that would make it not run in new machines.
I've used trial versions of PS and LR for a very brief time when I first became serious about digital photography. I quickly stopped using these products and focused on "getting it right" from the very beginning. I believe that there is a line that has been crossed concerning how much PP is used in digital photography. I won't cross that line, ever. I perform little or no PP to my photographs. If I use PP, I use Nikon View NX2, Canon DPP software or Picasa (catalog, post to web albums and send.) only.
Whatever faults my photographs may contain, at least they're honest...and I can live with that.
Ho1972 wrote:
I would be interested in short circuiting (my legally purchased but not yet installed) CS6's activation though. It was a simple matter of editing the Hosts file in earlier versions but I read that no longer works.
It can still be done but how would you respond to someone using your images without paying you a license fee? Kind of puts the "shoe" on the other foot.
Ho1972 wrote:
I've paid Adobe, what's your point? I just want to avoid the glitches that can crop up with activation.
And this is the point Adobe never quite understood. That pirated software offered more functionality because it wasn't dependent on verification. I would be out in the field, and then bam, PSCS cuts me off because I don't have an internet connection.
On location this could mean the loss of a job, or worse, my reputation.
Why can't I run my legally acquired software without verification? I have no choice but to use a hacked version because it might be career suicide if my HD goes down when doing a shoot, and I cannot run off of a cloned drive or backup.
