LarryK

rdc13: Can anybody say "New Coke"?

Does anybody remember it?

Rage Joe: Just say NO to the extoritonists!

tell the truth: DID I SAY ADOBE SUCKS ? I REALLY MEAN ADOBE SUCKS BIG TIME !!

Amateurbob: 99% of people with cameras do not need Adobe software. The old Picture Publisher 10 still works fine. Or Zoner will do everything necessary to post edit a picture. The only drawback for those who like complication is that one does not have to read a book or take a class to use non-Adobe software. The other 1% could probable do without Adobe also. Adobe has a monopoly on photo software because those who think only the most expensive cameras take the best pictures also think the most expensive software gives the only acceptable results.

Peter K Burian: Actually, Photoshop CC will be only $10 per month for the first year for owners of CS3 or a newer version. https://creative.adobe.com/plans Click on Single App .... Click on Requires Annual Commitment ... select Requires CS3+ purchase, and it's $10 per month.

(That just means you must have purchased CS3, or a newer version, some time in the past to get the $10 per month deal.)

rdc13: I've used Photoshop since its inception. I've bought and re-bought versions of it as I saw fit. I use Illustrator and InDesign also, all three on a daily basis.

At work we use v6, at home I use v5.
Will I buy the cloud-based Adobe products? Not sure - I'm not interested in subscribing to a service. I want a product.

I think that at work, the number of people who will be getting the cloud-based Suite of services will be cut. Quick guess here but we'll probably cut Photoshop from the marketing group - they will get InDesign but nothing else. MAYBE the designers will get the entire suite, maybe not.

It's an opportunity to cut costs, forced on us by a product that is now a service. The bean counters will be chopping, that I can guarentee.

Adobe will be the next Quark XPress.

kgreggain: The surprising part to me - is that the people complaining about Adobe's new greed model are not pirates - they are legitimate and faithful customers who have purchased the product (as I have since version 3.5).

The dig about (hobbyist photographic community) shows much about what Adobe thinks about us hobbyists, but as a hobbyist that makes no money, I still dished out 695.00 for my first version and 200 - 249 for each successive upgrade. Apparently hobbyist dollars are not good enough for Adobe.

I am a retoucher and a photographer so I use much of the main editing power of Photoshop but could easily migrate to another application.

From friends and co-workers in the Creative Suite from Adobe, it is blatantly obvious the concerns expressed are not just from the hobbyists, but in fact from the Adobe customer community in general.

I wish you luck in your choice, but I think given the economy, you have a rude awakening lurking behind your doors.

Warren Westura: Just caught another gotcha in the CC...the software deactivates if you don't use it for awhile....and there is a higher price if you want to discontinue use when YOU want to.
Good Grief. These people ought to be spanked! I know it is their bat and ball to play with but they really are treating customers as chattel. If I treated my customers with this kind of disdain, I would not have any!

Mike921: No desire to be politically correct here - I live in the 3rd world, where both the 'cloud' and even electricity are less than reliable. Is Adobe so smug and US centric that they're going to ignore most of the rest of the world?

Biowizard: It's taken a number of years, but this is the obvious and inevitable follow-on from the "Authorisation/Activation" model that Adobe first introduced with the original CS (that followed on after Photoshop 7, Illustrator 10 & InDesign 2). Up till then, you could buy your CD, and install it on a computer without even having to register it. You had a personal serial number, and "agreed" not to make multiple installations or to give the software away. And if you did the latter, the serial number could be traced to you.

With CS, once you'd installed your software, you had to go online to get your stuff "activated" - without this it wouldn't work. At the time, many of us felt this could one day be abused, and this is one of several reasons I stuck with PS 7.

Looks like we sceptics were right all along. It's just taken Adobe a few years longer than we originally thought.

This is BAD, Adobe. VERY BAD.

roy5051: Strikes me that Adobe are cutting their own throats. Does this mean that CS6 will be updated with all the new camera RAW facilities ad infinitum, or will the updates only be vailable to those who rent the newer system?

PhotoByRichard: Most users don't upgrade every version
More like every 2-3 version. Or even longer
The new subscription fees means higher cost for most average users.
In the end people will most likely;
1. Switch to other software
2. give more motivation for people to just pirate it, even the user who paid for it currently.

Either way it will upset the existing users and decrease your user base dramatically

Lights: I have an older version of Photoshop. It does pretty much what I want it to, but in conjunction with other editing programs (like Elements, Lightroom, Aftershot Pro, Raw Therapee, etc.etc). and it will stay as such. I fell out of the upgrade path (every third version), and at the time was worried that I did. I'm not so worried now, but instead rather happy. I'm not a "cloud" type of person...would rather control my own creative destiny, for better or worse.

Josh152: With a major player like adobe taking up the subscription only model it will open the flood gates and using your computer for anything beyond web browsing and e-mail will no longer be affordable. It is only a matter of time before even operating systems are "cloud" only subscriptions. Just wait until your office programs, multimedia programs, games, ect, all require a different subscription fee. Imagine being stuck with one brand of software because it's another $20-$50 a month to get access to a title in the software suite from a different brand. We could end up in a situation where just using your computer as you do now costs $100+ a month. The only way this won't happen is if Adobe is forced to give up the subscription nonsense due to lack of sales. Unfortunately that will never happen. Most will just go along with it an pay adobe their monthly fee.

Josh152: I have always been against the "cloud." because it simply doesn't exist. What is actually happening with all this cloud nonsense is your data is ending up on different servers owned by different corporations all of whom have different privacy policies and security standards. There is no one single "cloud" where it is all stored. It is just a server owned by some faceless company which you have never even heard of, then rented by them to another company you have never even heard who charges the maker of your software for storage space. You have no way of really knowing how secure it is or who actually has access to your data. You just have to take them at their word that it is secure and privet.

roy5051: Is "gw5815" employed by Adobe?

dark goob: Everyone, flag gw5815's spam posts. Obvious Adobe employee is obvious...

5DMkIII Shooter: The only option is that no-one registers / sign up to make use of the service. All just stick to what they are using now. The creative "Genius" at Adobe who came up with this utterly brilliant "stab your users in the back" idea would then soon realise that photographers own their gear and that gear also includes their software. No Adobe, NO!

sportyaccordy: I dont see the problem. *If you are actually buying the software and keeping up with updates,* this new subscription deal will be cheaper in the long run ($600/yr vs $1200/yr for each new version of CS). Plus it pretty much nukes any compatibility issues. If you go for a year subscription you won't have a monthly bill anyway- just 1 annual bill, which would be half of what you would be paying for the offline version. Plus I am not sure what the deal is with the old software but I imagine they would keep selling it for people who don't want to commit. When you run the numbers, it works out better, *for people who actually buy the products.*

Something tells me much of the bellyaching is coming from people who have never given a dime to Adobe, or can't do basic math. Either way I am sure Adobe won't miss your Bittorrent downloads. It's a great business move and an indicator of things to come.