Photomonkey: For all the anger directed at Adobe there are precious few real full featured alternatives to PS. The GIMP might be the best but as it STILL does not have 16 bit support it falls short as a pro app for me. I use a number of features in PS that may be available in other apps but it took me years to get my skills honed in PS and I have little enthusiasm for starting all over in some app that may not have what I need.As a working pro I need PS but at the moment I don't need to upgrade. If I had been cutting corners by hanging on to CS3 I may be a bit peeved.When a major upgrade comes to PS I will move to the subscription model because I will have to. BUT the upgrade will have to be magical.
Thanks for the heads up on Photoplus. I have just been trying out Photoshop Elements, which is only 8 bit color and garbage in comparison. Really, if that is all Adobe thinks serious photographers need they can stuff themselves.
MarcLee: To the people whining about "the competition does not have this", or "the competition does not have that", get real. Unless you buy a high end camera, your camera does not have a bunch of functions that owners of a 1DX for example have. Sometimes not spending so much has a small disadvantage. Taking a stand against greed may involve a little sacrifice. It's this attitude that has made Adobe the monster it is. Let the suckers pay Adobe's overheads for less innovation. There is plenty of software out there to do MOST of what MOST people need. Support it and it will do more. Find out what you need. And buy it. I would like a 5D MK III to cost no more than my point and shoot. Guess what? It ain't going to happen.
Unless the one who is asking suddenly unilaterally changes the terms of business.
To the people whining about "the competition does not have this", or "the competition does not have that", get real. Unless you buy a high end camera, your camera does not have a bunch of functions that owners of a 1DX for example have. Sometimes not spending so much has a small disadvantage. Taking a stand against greed may involve a little sacrifice. It's this attitude that has made Adobe the monster it is. Let the suckers pay Adobe's overheads for less innovation. There is plenty of software out there to do MOST of what MOST people need. Support it and it will do more. Find out what you need. And buy it. I would like a 5D MK III to cost no more than my point and shoot. Guess what? It ain't going to happen.
SeeRoy: Now, if Microsoft are looking for the "killer app" that will help resuscitate the still-born Windows 8, they should buy one of these contenders and accelerate its development.
By definition, that would be a duopoly. And you should be careful with that word anyway. Cheerleaders are, one second, arguing Adobe has a monopoly,and the next arguing anti-trust legislation does not apply because it does not.
Daniel Bliss: I don't think Adobe has a clue what they've done. They've literally discontinued one product and launched another. It's really that drastic. They've discontinued a standalone system for photography, video and graphics and replaced it with a subscription service. They think that just because it's basically the same applications it's no big deal, just a profitable and convenient change in procedure. But it really is an all-new product combined with abruptly discontinuing something people have long depended on, and they're going to learn the hard way what they've done.
Wave those pom poms.
MarcLee: Looking at the zeal with which some here defend Adobe's rights to restrict the choices of its longtime customers, and basically tell them to FOAD, it is hardly surprising Adobe uses the term "evangelists".
Thank you cheerleader No. 2. And we have every right to be disgusted with their rapaciousness and their hostageware. And to express and act on that contempt. You are free to continue to pay our portion of their company overheads.
Besides seeing the CPU working overtime, PhotoNinja is really incredibly slow to process raws.
That's not funny at all.
Now: Part of the problem may, that's "may", be that PhotoNinja has to build a library from whatever folder the raws are in before it processes any raw from that folder, but if that folder has say 200 raws, PhotoNinja may get distracted.
Anyhow, Photoshop CS6 and Bridge CS6 are much faster, even when working together.
PhotoNinja does a good job, but it not going to be taken seriously if it remains this slow and resource hogging.
The main program not being taken seriously right now seems to be Lightroom. There are many issues to consider when establishing a longterm workflow and longterm trust of a vendor is one of them.
Kway: I hope we can trust them for this. I don't see myself turn over to capture one or dxo, cause they're more expensive than LR. If I want to upgrade LR, I can just buy the upgrade version. Aftershot is not good enough to be compared to LR (I've tried it).Open source alternative like RAWTherapee is just too slow and lacks a lot of functions and good UI.But when the time comes Adobe makes LR CC-only, I hope there will be a good alternative product.
Capture One is actually a lot less expensive once you are on the upgrade path. It is also excellent.
Many thanks for this article. Very welcomed at this time.
Lea5: To STU 5. You CAN run Corel DRAW on a Mac. Read:
And the most important statements:
"We also make sure to test new releases on our design software on Apple computers."
"Adobe’s recent announcement will put the discussion back on the table."
"Of course I read all the negative stuff. How else could I comment on it!" Reading involves comprehension. You seem to be having issues with that.
" to jump between OS systems is a joke if you have deadlines to meet."
Ha ha ha. Meanwhile "evangelists" like you are telling people they can keep running old versions of Photoshop forever if only they maintain a partition with an old OS on their system.
Get some consistency guys.
Josh152: As aside note can we please stop calling anyone who isn't' acting like adobe is the next incarnation of Satan and instead is taking a more objective view of the situation a troll or adobe shill? It just makes everyone, even people with legitimate concerns, seem like ignorant children afraid of change.
Stu, just as, in relationships, I'd choose the girl who has not cheated on me, lied to me, and told me in no uncertain terms she has no interest in me, over the one who has done all the above, I will not give Adobe the benefit of the doubt.
As others have said: "Fool me twice, shame on me." applies here. But you may be fooled as many times as you like.
Varying mileage. I was recently sitting at a lunch table with six Mac using friends and we had ALL had issues in the past six months. Either with software or drop dead hardware. The geniuses are great. I'd just rather not have to see them so often.
Looking at the zeal with which some here defend Adobe's rights to restrict the choices of its longtime customers, and basically tell them to FOAD, it is hardly surprising Adobe uses the term "evangelists".
Stu fondly imagines that once they have got him locked into the subscription system Adobe will have motivation to make their system and file formats if anything MORE open rather than less. In fact, all their motivation will be to lock you in tighter and boost prices whenever they feel like it.
And that could be quite a lot if say (optimistically) 25% of the previous user base has to pay ALL their running costs because 75% have jumped ship.
Guess you have not used a PC for a long time Stu. I have had as many problems with my Macs as my PCs lately, particularly over stupid issues like OS upgrade incompatibility with Time Machine. Not to mention hardware errors like a Macbook Air that decided not even to start. As a dual system user, it always amazes me how Mac users never consider they time they spend with "Geniuses" when comparing systems.
Stu5, none of the above except Creative Cloud holds MY creativity hostage. Rents being what they are in my area however, I do often feel I am working for my landlord. Which is again why I, like most people, would choose to buy if that choice was not taken away. No one has questioned your right to work for Adobe by paying your subscriptions at their unilaterally decided price.
But you are spending an awful lot of time here trying to convince others they should not resent choice being taken away and their work being held hostage.
Adobe have shown their true colours. Just like one trusts a faithful wife more than an unfaithful one, the trust issue is THEIR creation.
Incidentally, I think Adobe have messed up Premiere even more than they have messed up Photoshop by this idea. Video editors are even more hostage to the software than photographers. It's ironic that they decided to make Final Cut Pro X more competitive again and give up the market boost they got from Apple's mess.
Don Shreve: I'll never pay to rent my software. It appears I'll be using CS5 until I die.
Funny that you call Photoninja a resource hog when most of us see it using less memory and working faster.
montygm: Looking at the absolutely overwhelming number of negative responses that the Adobe bombshell has caused. This will probably go down as the biggest corporate blunder in photographic history. Serves them right!
Being not concerned about customer dissatisfaction is hardly a sign of a good company.
If you are paying the subscription fee you are working for Adobe whether you like it or not.