Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction

I think Adobe have a bad management and this is a crash strategy. They are giving a good chance to the other software companies. Nothing last for ever, not even Adobe.

I guess I'm going to start asking if "I need photoshop"? I guess the answer is I needed it for the $50/year or so it was costing me. At $240/year I'll find something else. The other software companies should be having parties.

Serif PhotoPlus X6: US$110, has virtually all the functionality of recent versions of photoshop, it's even laid out like photoshop so that the learning curve is next to nill... http://www.serif.com/photoplus . See ya Adobe!

This interview was supposed to help Adobe's cause?
It just shows the extent of their miscalculations.

I've got two words for Adobe (no, not those two...):

New Coke.

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.

Not for me I'm afraid. I'll stick with CS6 for as long as it works, then look elsewhere.

Big brother decided for us - 99 days, not 1 more! LMAO )))

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.

I feel sorry for ADOBE for making this GREEDY and STUPID decision.

But I have to say there is no cure or medicine for STUPIDITY and GREED unfortunately.

GOODBYE ADOBE ! ! !

NO THANKS ! ! !
GOODBYE TO ADOBE.
There are plenty of alternatives to Adobe and better software.
RIP ADOBE ! ! ! ! ! !

We do not need Adobe.

For image editing, we have:

- Cinepaint, at http://www.cinepaint.org

- GIMP, at http://www.gimp.org

For RAW conversion and adjustment, we have:

- Darktable, at http://www.darktable.org/

- RawTherapee, at http://www.rawtherapee.com/

None of these programs have Product Activation or depend on a Cloud connection in order to be used to access and work with our files. Needless to say, they can be backed up and re-installed at any time.

Many years ago, I saw this coming.

When Microsoft and Adobe introduced Product Activation and forced their customers to be dependent on specific connections and license controls in order to work with their own files, I said that Product Activation was a precursor to their wet dream: To force all software users to use software as a subscription service, so that one cannot even write a letter to grandma without having paid for the subscription. Unfortunately, all too many accepted Product Activation.

There is one principle which is inviolable:

If we are to have safety of our data and full certainty that we will always be able to use our computers and access our data, it is an absolute prerequisite that the operating system and all applications are user-controlled. That means, the software needs to be capable of being copied, and the software must be capable of being installed and run indefinitely on compatible hardware with no ties at all to its manufacturer.

Per Inge Oestmoen

Dear Mr. Hendrickson; as a long-time Adobe user (since 1996), and as someone who has spent a lot of money on your software over the years, and convinced many friends to buy it, I just have one thing to say to you and your crew;

Bye!

What an unbelievable GREED BASED decision. You are going to lose MOST of your customers; we are artists, and we are united, and we no longer put up with this bull****.

**** you and your company. This WILL make you fail.

Sincerely,
Cameron Hood

I´ve used PS since Barney scans but unless Adobe re-adds the purchase option CS6 will be the last version I will use.
Even if LR has been taking the grunt of the processing with most image editing compared PS is still a vital tool in image editing but I will abandon PS for this reason and I am so p***ed off with adobe for this that I will look at C1 and aperture for replacement for LR as well.

Photographer and photoshop teacher
I am downloading gimp as I type!!!!

All the complainers are greatly mistaken. Adobe's 2013 profits are down by half, with return on equity now a bare 4%. The software publishing earnings outlook is bleak unless competitors either ape Adobe or cease R&D and merely remarket existing products at successively lower and lower prices. The (mostly good) products sold by Corel originated with firms that went bankrupt, and even Corel lost money and ended up owned by its creditors. Avid has lost boatloads of money.

The driving cause of all this is the slow-down in PC sales and the diminishing marginal returns of fancier or more complex products. Competition in the cut-price iOS or Android "apps" world is another factor.

Competitors like C1 are about to grow as Adobe feed them like this. The attitude of Adobe might need to grow a pair, away from this recently upcoming childishness not to lose users.

Dear Adobe,

Because you dominate the market with your software you are immune from the possibility of real competition and loss of market share. Your current smug attitude will serve you and your stockholders well, carry on!

Sent from my Blackberry.

Well, I felt compelled to make a parody of all the ridiculous happening. Hopefully it brings a laugh and less anger :)

Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPTc79Qw2g4

Let me know what you think :)

Dear Winston:

http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org http://www.gimp.org

"Last year we actually cut the price of Lightroom in half in order to open it up to a broader market of photographers."

Riiiiiiiiight. After Apple dropped the price of Aperture to $80.

I will keep using CS6 until it stops working. I was using CS3 for over 6 years. If I can get 6 or 7 years out of CS6, that will put me near 70 years of age. I might not need any Adobe products by then.

Terrible Idea, following in Microsoft's footsteps. Good luck, will look for something else.

I keep reading posts from people who say they have PS CS6 so they are all set for several years. That may be, but only until Adobe stops updating the Camera Raw definitions for CS6. You may then be forced to use JPEG or TIFF files on your future new digital cameras whose native RAW files are not supported by Camera Raw in CS6. Yes, you could possibly use the individual camera makers (or some other) raw conversion software then open the converted files in CS6. But that is a two-step process and very time consuming. And what options are there for PS users, such as myself, who still have even older versions like CS5 or earlier? There is NO upgrade path to CS6 now for thousands of users other than subscribing to Creative Cloud forever. We are hung out to dry!

If the Photoshop CC option is so fantastic (as Adobe claim), why not offer it alongside the usual perpertual licence model? If it's that good, everyone will flock to it, and Adobe's stock (in every sense) would be restored.

Have the courage of your convictions, Adobe!

While Photoshop is considered the best at what is does, it does far more than what most people need. Programs like Pixelmator or GIMP need an advocate like Scott Kelby to generate training materials (books, videos, etc) to assist in the learning of these programs. Adobe has abundant 3rd party resources and advocates and enjoys popularity and exclusivity because of that.

I am still happy with PS7. Could be strange, but it is totally enough the few tools incl. colour management. LR is somewhat different story. I am really worried about the possible future changes to LR subscribtion only version. It is (or was?) a decent tool for raw conversion. Perhaps I will need to find another one. In that case we have meaninglessness of the DNG format.

BTW, why are we alloud to vote "Like", but no possibility to "Dislike" in the responses?

Hey Winston, does the amount of outrage in "the hobbyist photographic community" match your expectations yet? ;-)

Besides pricing and everything else, there is one more even more severe issue with this Adobe approach.

Under the requirement to validate the license the users actually must agree that Adobe is allowed to spy reqularly their computer - Adobe may validate the license on a computer but they also may look for something else. You don't know.

I am not sure that many private persons will be happy with this approach, nothing to say about companies, which must permit to access to their intranet.

I never rent anything. Exceptions being 'temporary' things like hire cars , a movie or an obscure DIY tool that I may only ever need to use once.
Whereas if it's something that I plan to use for a worthwhile duration, I buy. Knowing full well that if I continued to rent or locked myself into a hire-purchase contract, I'd be almost certainly paying far more in the end. And naturally, we all have a better sense of security when owning something we value.

Rent Photoshop? Well, I assumed PS as a permanent-use product for me. This conflicts completely against my principles. It's monopolistic, unethical and just plain ill conceived.

This bodes ill for American software. In my mind Apple and Microsoft are arrogant, greedy companies that care little about service for their customers. They are simply out to screw as much out of the customer as possible while locking them into a system. Now Adobe joins them.

We await a good replacement from Europe, India, China or elsewhere. The arrogant software companies will follow arrogant hardware companies to the grave. If you want to keep customers, treat them well.

We have:

"The reason behind the subscription-only move is the logistics of supporting two sets of software. The last 12 months of development was brutal."

Give me a break, please. There is barely any difference between PS on a disc and PS downloaded from the so-called 'cloud'. In factm if they were different in any way, this would be a problem (leaving aside the extra cloud features). Does the Adobe spokesperson and apologist for this appalling move really expect us t believe that this type of software development is too hard for a billion dollar company that specialises in writing software. I find it incredible what they expect gullible customers to believe as the rationale. It borders on contempt for intelligent users. As for the last 12 months being brutal - it's such hyperbole. Poor dear things - they had to work hard to write some code. Can Adobe managers not understand that customers can see that this CC move is purely a revenue generating exercise?

Says it all really.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=67Iw9q2X9cU

I think that Adobe is running out of ideas what else to add to Photoshop or Lightroom to justify new paid upgrades. People recognize this fact and are unwilling to do each and every upgrade Adobe unleashes on us. Many photographers I know are still running CS4 / CS5 / LR3 and they say that it does everything they'll ever need. A big problem for Adobe...

Now Adobe announces that camera RAW support for CS6 will end some time soon, so in the likely case of buying a brand new SLR camera model in the future I'll get stuck, because there will be trouble working with those new RAW files directly in Photoshop CS6 / Lightroom 4. To me this strategy of Adobe's is nothing but blackmail.

Anyway, Adobe's plan is a wake-up call for me, realizing that we photographers have fallen prey to a monopolist who is now trying to constantly milk as many $$$ out of us as possible. Time to wake up and look for alternatives. To me this is only the beginning. What will come next if people don't react now?

Occasional PS6 and LR4 user. This model does not suit me at all. Will keep using until they don't work. No more revenue for Adobe from me.

"Adobe Jumps Off A Cliff, Leaves Parachute Behind"...

...this quote is from commentator Joel West on the NASDAQ site about Adobe. He goes on to say...

"On the other hand, the shift to seek revenue growth through a new business model - rather than creating new products - could be seen as a sign of weakness".

Certainly Adobe's share market value today ($45) is less today than what it was mid 2007 ($47).

Adobe's products have now got to a stage where they are very bloated with functionality.

I think one of the previous posts is probably on the money. "It is the beginning of the end for Adobe".

When a company like Adobe stops listening to its customers, that IS a sure sign of the beginning of the end.

Now is a good time for other companies to ramp up their development. For example Microsoft's WebMatrix 3 is a free and is a potential replacement for Dreamweaver.