nnowak: The piracy statements are pure marketing BS.
The only reason for switching to a subscription model is that it guarantees a steady and dependable revenue stream. No more need for major annual or semi-annual software revisions in the hopes of luring new customers or upgraders. No more spikes in sales right after a new release followed by lagging sales as software nears end of life. No need for discounts to clear out previous version software. The programmers now only need to roll out small new features on an ad-hoc basis.
Nothing about the cloud service (functional or financial) is beneficial to me and is only designed to help Adobe. CS6 is the end of my relationship with Adobe.
With all of the people promising to abandon Adobe, I don't see how this ridiculous change will be a financial benefit in the long run. Maybe Adobe will die a quick death and then that steaming pile that is Flash will be gone forever too. I can only hope.
"... people will keep using their CS6 products for a very long time."
Do not underestimate Adobe's understanding and resolve to neuter CS6 as early as possible to force its users to subscribe and get on board CC.
Given this development, I wonder whether the major camera manufacturers will come to the understanding that in addition to the camera body and lenses, the software component is the third and crucial leg on which digital photography stands and that they have a major role to play on this matter.
While developing a software such as Adobe Photoshop is beyond the capabilities of these camera manufacturers, their adoption of a common RAW file standard (definitely not DNG!) just like what they are doing with JPG will go a long way in helping other software companies to provide alternatives to Adobe's offering.
Adopting a common RAW standard and doing away with the need to constantly update the RAW converter (essentially, ACR for Adobe) every time a new camera model is released will mean that the user will have more money to spend on camera gears rather than spend it to update software to be able to make use of new model releases.
Jimmy jang Boo: How about a voice of reason crying in the wilderness???
"If you're going to complain about Adobe CC, at least understand it!"
Adobe's marketing is partly responsible for the confusion by using "Cloud" when it actually means subscription.
LGO: For those planning to use the Lightroom in lieu of ACR (which is only available through subscription) to process RAW files from future camera models then port the file to Photoshop, be advised that Adobe can "upgrade" the future versions of the Lightroom output so that it will be incompatible with CS6 to pressure the user to subscribe.
The user does have an option to output a DNG or TIF from Lightroom as an intermediate file and use this in Photoshop but this will slow the workflow and take up storage space.
At best, the LR + Photoshop (CS6) should be seen as a temporary solution that will work until such time that Adobe makes the underlying ACR engine in LR incompatible for use with Photoshop. Because of this, I am now on the lookout for another software that will replace LR and Photoshop.
I considered this (just read my post carefully).
DNG as a solution will work if you do not mind a slower workflow and have still another file that will take up space in the main storage and backup storage.
For those planning to use the Lightroom in lieu of ACR (which is only available through subscription) to process RAW files from future camera models then port the file to Photoshop, be advised that Adobe can "upgrade" the future versions of the Lightroom output so that it will be incompatible with CS6 to pressure the user to subscribe.
photo nuts: Are there pictures of the hard filters for matching fluorescent and tungsten lighting? Curious about those