Previous news story    Next news story

Adobe expands Photoshop and Lightroom offer

By dpreview staff on Nov 21, 2013 at 16:45 GMT

When Adobe announced a version of Creative Cloud for photographers in September, there was a catch -- you had to already own Photoshop CS3 or later to qualify for the special pricing.  

Now Adobe is lifting that requirement for a limited time. Through December 2, 2013, the $9.99 (£8.78/€12,29) per month subscription is available to everyone. The offer applies to the first twelve months' subscription, after which it will rise to the normal price of $19.99/month.

Signing up gives you access to:

  • Photoshop CC
  • Bridge CC
  • Lightroom 5
  • 20GB of cloud storage 
  • Behance ProSite

This time the catch is a one-year commitment that is billed monthly. 

Via: CNET, Source: Adobe

Comments

Total comments: 625
12345
Steve Bingham
By Steve Bingham (3 months ago)

. . . it's called setting the hook. :) The price is $9.99 a month for the current year, and then $19.99 a month in subsequent years.

Now how about your CC creations . . . on the cloud.
Set the hook, then reel them in. :)

1 upvote
bigfatron
By bigfatron (4 months ago)

Interesting to note that the deal has now been extended to Dec 8.

0 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

Well, some good news here I reckon, looks like Adobe are cracking even quicker than we thought.

I noticed today that their dummed-down "Elements" range has fallen to half the price of what they were (less than half in some cases). The Photoshop/Premiere Elements bundle for example is down from £120 to less than £50.

I'm guessing that so many people are ditching them and choosing the pay-once alternatives, that Adobe have decided to try and beat those packages by tempting you into their relatively underpowered Elements stuff.

That's what I reckon, anyway.

Let's just hope people won't fall for that one, either. When it comes to choosing between Corel Photopaint X6, Serif Photoplus X6 or Elements, remember who ALWAYS had fair prices and those who did not.

Adobe DID NOT - so please support the ones that always did. Keep this up and like any business, they WILL come crawling with their tail between their legs with the customer back in control.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (5 months ago)

IIRC Elements and Lightroom usually get a temporary major cut this time of year. I bought LR4 for instance on about a 30-40% off deal last year. So I wouldn't read too much into it. I remember seeing the Elements combo on Amazon Black Friday deals for about £50.

If they were genuinely 'cracking' then the $9.99 CC deal would be permanent and with some genuine future commitment and not expiring on Monday.

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
LarryinNsb
By LarryinNsb (5 months ago)

Adobe say the is an annual contract and if you cancel after 30 days you will have to pay 1/2 of the remaining balance. The must have taken lessons from the phone companys. I think I'll skip the early temination fee and stay with Aftershot for organization and Lightzone for the workflow.

1 upvote
Chiemsee
By Chiemsee (5 months ago)

From what official Adobe document is the number $19.99/month (for the second year)???

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Chiemsee
By Chiemsee (5 months ago)

By the way, of course Adobe doesn't say the price is FIXED... But I didn't see the 19.99 anywhere... Maybe effectively hidden?

(Just a side note: The German Adobe website is kind of horrible concerning spelling, grammar and especially style... seems no native speaker ever looked over it. Kind of embarassing for a - former? - international top company... Of course it's not a problem for me or anybody, but it nevertheless somehow shows the the attitude of a company towards its customer base one could argue.)

2 upvotes
Prognathous
By Prognathous (5 months ago)

Adobe: The price is $9.99 a month for the current year, and then $19.99 a month in subsequent years.

(Source: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3581971)

3 upvotes
madambutterflycc
By madambutterflycc (5 months ago)

On Adobe Facebook page they posted "$9.99 is *the* price, not a first year only promo price. The price may need to go up at some point to account for things like inflation." Still not taking the bait...looking at Aftershot Pro for a price of $25. Deal expires Nov. 28.

1 upvote
BaldCol
By BaldCol (5 months ago)

Another thread is NOT a source. Everyone is just trying to guess a figure and plucking numbers out of the air. I spoke to Adobe and they said that the price will rise to $19.99 if your surname is in the second half of the alphabet but only $15.99 otherwise.

3 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (5 months ago)

I've heard that it shouldn't go up too off Adobe staff via FB, but if that's the case then why not officially state that through more official channels? Much like their support people repeatedly saying 'this is the ongoing price' doesn't sit well with this whole thing being a time-limited offer. Its a toe in the water at a different price point on Adobe's part given the initial reaction to CC (especially those who don't make proper income using Adobe tools). Which way things go I don't think they entirely know themselves yet.

So if in about 12 months it doesn't go up more than pence/cents for this years deal-takers on renewal then i'll probably look at it again then. As it is I've got LR4 (haven't quite been able to justify upgrading that quite yet) and I don't do enough stuff often enough outside of that to quite justify springing for Photoshop.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
BaldCol
By BaldCol (5 months ago)

" As it is I've got LR4 (haven't quite been able to justify upgrading that quite yet) and I don't do enough stuff often enough outside of that to quite justify springing for Photoshop."
I you don't need Photoshop then I can't see how this deal is worth it. Just upgrade to LR5 standalone or if you are happy with LR4 wait and see if LR6 has something to temp you. Adobe have said that LR will remain as a standalone product.

0 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (5 months ago)

I'd get use out of it (I use it in my day job so am quite savvy with it) but it was just a question of whether I'd get additional extra out of it over and above what i have now to justify such an open ended commitment.

0 upvotes
gesper
By gesper (5 months ago)

This ISN'T an expansion of the original offer. That one specifically said the price would never change as along as you signed up by December 31. Now the price is only good for a year and you have to sign up by December 2. I can only assume it eventually defaults the "normal" price which is double.

1 upvote
Archibald Tuttle
By Archibald Tuttle (5 months ago)

ADOBE? No, thank you! It's not even that I don't like the products but I don't want anything from a company who doesn't care at all when Millions of their user accounts have been hacked. Fortunately I'm not depending on their services.

1 upvote
icexe
By icexe (5 months ago)

Corel PaintShop Pro X6 Ultimate is $49.99 right now. And you'll own it forever.

8 upvotes
Bob Meyer
By Bob Meyer (5 months ago)

I have to laugh at all the criticism of Adobe. If you don't like it, don't sign up. Nobody is holding a gun to your head.

I have to laugh at those people who say it's "wrong," especially those who tell me what is good for me. It's neither right nor wrong. It's a business decision. If it generates more income for Adobe it's "right" for the company and it's shareholders. Adobe isn't in business to make you happy; it's in business to make money. And what's "right or wrong" for you doesn't matter to me; I'll make up my own mind, thank you.

The only real problem I have with this deal is that it's bait and switch. After 1 year Adobe jacks the price back up to their normal rate, anf you're screwed.

2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (5 months ago)

I have to laugh at people who criticise other people for criticising.

Meanwhile, these special offers do not suggest the Borg is working as well as Adobe had hoped.

8 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (5 months ago)

" Adobe isn't in business to make you happy;" I am sorry, but that is a losing attitude for any company to have to its customers.

7 upvotes
Danny
By Danny (5 months ago)

Adobe WAS in business to make it's customers happy. Now they are in business to make mountains of money at the expense of it's customers. This is the beginning of the end of the glorious days of PS, a product I supported for more than 16 years.

1 upvote
TLD
By TLD (5 months ago)

They have actually stated that the price will be locked in IIRC

0 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (5 months ago)

They haven't committed to any such thing. I've had conversations with Adobe where their customer services say it 'might' stay at that rate forever (even a suggestion it could go 'pay what its worth') but there has been no hard contractual commitment of the sort. TBH if they committed even for a couple of years I would've already signed up. However, what they're not saying is what's putting me off.

0 upvotes
Doug Frost
By Doug Frost (5 months ago)

It's true that Adobe isn't in business to make me happy. But then, I'm not in the habit of doing business with companies that make me unhappy.

4 upvotes
NorCalAl
By NorCalAl (5 months ago)

Agree 100%,Bob. So tired of people thinking what they think is right, is right! What happened to 'if ya don't like it, don't look'!

0 upvotes
The Scurvy Dog of PR
By The Scurvy Dog of PR (5 months ago)

This just in! And why I can no longer trust Adobe to do the right thing. Who knew they still have not notified everyone of their security breech of a month ago? http://www.electronista DOT /articles/13/11/25/up.to.138.million.adobe.cc.accounts.violated.by.data.breach/

0 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (5 months ago)

I've certainly never been told about the account hack by them but oddly I now get spam to an address that was only ever used for an Adobe ID account. How odd.

4 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

To all of you who thinks this is ok, it isn't, and in the simplest way possible, here's why:

It is NOT ok to continually pay for a product you will never own. Other than blatant greed, I cannot, no matter how hard I try, see any reason you should not be allowed to keep the product once your subscriptions have covered the cost of the retail product.

If you can think of even ONE reason you should not be allowed to keep the product you had covered the cost of, then I'm all ears!

People need to get a grip and stop talking crap. I could pay, say, £600 for a Photoshop licence before, and therefore there is no reason I should not be able to keep my licence once I covered that £600 in subscription fees.

What they are doing ought to be illegal, it is NOT a phone service, it is NOT a product that can ONLY work through a subscription model. They should offer a choice, or, allow you to keep your licence once covered but stop the updates if you stop paying your subscription.

END OF

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
12 upvotes
NorCalAl
By NorCalAl (5 months ago)

They DO offer a choice! Don't buy it if you don't like it!

0 upvotes
BaldCol
By BaldCol (5 months ago)

"It is NOT ok to continually pay for a product you will never own. "

I wonder how many of the people making these comments rent houses and offices.

2 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (5 months ago)

With rented property you do in some cases have some restriction on rises in rent and you also have a healthy market of alternate property if someone starts taking liberties.

1 upvote
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

BaldCol, wow, you really don't get it do you?

A software licence is NOT a house or an office, nor is it a phone. Such things lend themselves to being rented, however, software does not because there is NO reason it needs to be in "Rent" form other than to milk you for a constant stream of cash.

I'll say it again because you keep dodging this one:

GIVE
ME
ONE
GOOD
REASON
WHY
YOU
SHOULD
NOT
BE
ALLOWED
TO
KEEP
THE
LICENSE
ONCE
YOU
HAVE
COVERED
WHAT
WOULD
BE
THE
RETAIL
COST
OF
THE
LICENCE.

Go on, try as hard as you like because whatever you come up with is going to be as wrong as this whole renting farce. It is people like you that companies such as Adobe thrive on.

2 upvotes
Dallas Dahms
By Dallas Dahms (5 months ago)

I would buy this, except when I tried to sign up Adobe says that because I am in South Africa I have to pay $29.99 per month.

I say screw that.

6 upvotes
ianp5a
By ianp5a (5 months ago)

If you don't like the deal they offer, don't take it. Don't get angry. Go somewhere else. Give your money to a rival to help them offer a better product. It's good for everyone. Even Adobe users. As Adobe will have to drop their prices or improve their product.
In fact, didn't they just drop their prices? Mass exodus appears to be working.

4 upvotes
Timur Born
By Timur Born (5 months ago)

I talked to Adobe's German shopping line today. According to them you get to rent Photoshop, but *own* Lightroom 5. The drawback is that when LR 6 arrives you have to buy an upgrade, just like anybody else.

Too bad, I would have been more tempted if I knew that I'd get two versions of Lightroom for about the same price that I'd have to pay for two upgrades, with Photoshop CC on top (owning LR4).

1 upvote
bigfatron
By bigfatron (5 months ago)

Timur, I had the same conversation with Adobe UK and they said both PS and LR on the CC offer are subscription-based. The only way you'd have LR post-subscription is if you already own a 'bought' version on perpetual licence (and you'd obviously only have whichever version you last bought outright).

And as others have said, some kind of commitment on price (even the first year renewal) would make a world of difference. I've even had people at Adobe say "well we've heard this is the price going forward", yet no one actually wants to officially commit to that. And the time limited nature of this $9.99/£8.78 offer only adds fuel to that scepticism.

The annoying thing is this offer should be an absolute no-brainer. However, the lack of transparency/firm commitment on Adobe's part (plus the damaged trust many have with them and total loss of software at the end of the subscription) makes me (and apparently many others) hold back.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
1 upvote
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

There must be some miscommunication going on in the different regions. Last I read, if/when the new Lightroom comes out you will get the latest one since you are part of the cloud/CC subscription.

In the comments section here:
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2013/09/photoshop-photography-program-now-available.html

If you do a word search for "Lightroom CC" and you should come across a response from Jeffrey Tranberry, who is a Senior Product Manager and Chief Customer Advocate for Adobe digital. He says that you'll get the upgrade to the next Lightroom through the subscription.

At least this is the case in the US. Now whether it is the same in other regions, I can't say for certain but would think it would be the same.

I hope this clears up some confusion.

0 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (5 months ago)

I'd expect the CC version of LR to get upgraded whilst I continue to subscribe. I wouldn't expect my 'bought' version of LR4 to get magically upgraded though.

Unless there is some quirk with LR that means they can't stop the upgrade being applied to the 'bought' version. This seems improbable though as if I went and bought a LR4 to LR5 upgrade now then don't you get a fresh licence code issued?

EDIT: Having read the Jeff Tranberry posts in your link he actually seems to back up what I'm saying. Yes you'll get upgrades to Lightroom via CC (as you'd expect) but this doesn't mean those updates will be applicable if you revert back to an older version you had on perpetual 'bought' licence. i.e. if you have LR4 now on perpetual, buy the CC deal and later cancel then you'll be back at LR4 as whatever version you had via CC will cease to work.

Comment edited 15 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Timur Born
By Timur Born (4 months ago)

So we get different statements from different people at Adobe. On what information should I base my buying decision. To be clear: I specifically asked the shopping line about upgrades to version 6. Of course it's very possible that he didn't know better, but then how should I?

And if you look through all the pages concerning this offer I found all but *one* repeating the specific wording of "Lightroom *5*", including the paragraphs about updates.

0 upvotes
Timur Born
By Timur Born (4 months ago)

I took the plunge and am very curious how the Lightroom 6 part works out.

0 upvotes
Timur Born
By Timur Born (4 months ago)

After reading a statement on a German Facebook page run by Adobe I took the plunge and just wait what happens once LR6 comes out. If it works out then one year of PS + LR subscription will cost me little more than updating LR two times (4 > 5 > 6).

0 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (4 months ago)

As I said, i'll wager that you'll get your CC version of Lightroom updated to whatever comes out during your subscription but once you stop paying that CC version will stop running and all you'll be able to do is install the version 4 that you own outright now. Think of your current LR4 and the copy of LR5 you get with CC as two entirely separate things.

0 upvotes
Timur Born
By Timur Born (4 months ago)

Yes, the LR4 in my backhand is good to have. I was very temped to buy a second license when LR5's full version was down 50% for a few days, making it cost less than an upgrade. Strangely it was only down 30% over Black Friday/Cyber Monday.

Anyway, one year of CC will give me two upgrades (LR5 + LR 6) and Photoshop as a bonus that I may or may not use regularly. If I stop the subscription afterwards I can just buy some LR4 -> LR6/7 upgrade and be good with it.

0 upvotes
icexe
By icexe (5 months ago)

The only way I can see this working is if Adobe adopted a far more reasonable and guaranteed pricing model.

A more reasonable structure would be $4.99/month for any single product, then offer special "bundle" prices (E.g. Any 3 for $12.99/month, any 5 for $19.99/month, the entire suite for $39.99/month).

But the most important part to get people on-board is to guarantee those prices for a minimum of five years.

Also, if/when you drop subscription for a given product, it should fall back to a "limited functionality mode" that allows you to still open, view, and print your current images but maybe disables most filters, or the ability the save any new changes, etc..

3 upvotes
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

Those are some good ideas. I do like the limited functionality mode to allow users to at least view their images.

Or if they wish to not do this, maybe at least come up with a separate dedicated viewer that is compatible with the latest PSD files that'll allow people to print or save their images to a more compatible format.

As for the guaranteed pricing structure, I like the idea but find a 5 year guarantee too wishful. Maybe a two year guarantee would be more realistic seeing as how much the market is fluctuating.

Another possibility is maybe guarantee a set rate for so many years if you agree to a contract of that many years or pay a lump sum amount up front. This will then introduce a tiered platform, much like how many cloud storage sites operate. Down side is that those who can only afford monthly or yearly get the least amount of savings, if any.

4 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (5 months ago)

good ideas here.

And i have yet another one.

How about they keep the price as it is but they only charge for a month if you use the product, even only once, in that month.

So for example, you use Ps on the first day of each month of Jan to March but on no other days of those months; you get charged the full month's rental for those three months. Then in April to June you don't use the product at all; in this situation, you don't get charged.

For non paying months the Cloud products good at least allow viewing of files but not saving or editing or any other features of the software; or better still, the Cloud products come with a separate viewer utility for those months when one doesn't want to pay the monthly rental.

This would be great for travelling photographers, who may be away on assignment for months at a time; they wouldn't be lumbered with a bill for something they aren't, and can't be, using.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
bigfatron
By bigfatron (5 months ago)

What I think a lot of people would go for is if after 2 or 3 years you had the option to terminate the subscription but maintain the version you were on 'as is' with no further updates/support. Maybe with a severance payment (say 6 months subs as a one-off lump sum) if the sums don't add up quite enough for the vendor. Yes, people can vote with their feet and move to another product but with proprietary formats and so on then the hassle can be considerable even if your old software still works 'as is'.

I've certainly used subscription-based software in the past (mainly development tools, MSDN and so on) and you always had the security that the stuff kept working 'as is' if you no longer needed continual updates. There was however a cost incentive in terms of reduced year 2+ rates to keep the subscription instead of just taking out a new minimum subscription every other year.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
1 upvote
kb2zuz
By kb2zuz (5 months ago)

Ok here's an actual issue I've had, I've talked to Adobe and they have no solution:

I work on the side for a small nonprofit community arts school. We are not an officially accredited school, we just teach classes mostly for hobbyists or artists wishing to expand their range. We only need Lightroom and Photoshop. We are a small program and have 6 computers.

Because we are not an accredited school and because multiple students will be using the software. The only option they offer that we are allowed to use is a Groups option which requires us to purchase the full suite (we do not teach Illustrator or Dreamweaver or Premier) and requires us to have an administrator (which we do not have or can afford to hire) switch the log ins between classes. This is ridiculous.

1 upvote
The Scurvy Dog of PR
By The Scurvy Dog of PR (5 months ago)

There are a bunch of Adobe Corporate trolls doing damage control on this forum. You can tell who they are because they will not show their real face. To them I say- This was a bad corporate move, moving to a Net based license compliance model. This was never about the "Cloud". Your software is pirated because you want too much for it. All software has an 'ark of development and application' and all but the internet tools have reached maturity. Adding new features is meaningless when they go beyond the tools original spec. That Corporate chose to kill off the boxed SW versus selling it side by side with the subscription version sez volumes about Adobe's corporate greed. Take this to the board... Tell them "it's bad for public rations to continue down this path". Tell them "we are hemorrhaging our loyal base and this will have long term effects on the corporate bottom line". This, they will understand.

8 upvotes
Yeshe
By Yeshe (5 months ago)

Adobe have yet to present us with an acceptable "Exit-strategy" before I commit to a subscription. Imagine what happens if you want to un-subscribe one year later and try to open your image-catalog you generated in Lightroom during that year in an older LR version from the pre-Creative Cloud era, - you cant! You're stuck with the subscription as long as you live if you want to open you generated libraries again! Lightroom and your libraries are being updated continuously (during the subscription-period) and will not be compatible with previous versions of Lightroom in the event that you would like to opt out of the subscription-plan at a later stage.

For those of us that are lucky enough to have access to excellent software such as Aperture, I say, stick to them!

/Thanks

Yeshe

7 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (5 months ago)

Really, this is a probelm with ANY software NO MATTER what payment strategy the vendor adopts ............... IF customers depend heavily on the cataloging features of a particular vendor's software product.

Really, my view is, that photographers should rely instead on a robust filing system such that, without cataloging, their files can easily be found. So for example, a photographer could have a directory structure on their hard drive like this: \ [year] \ [month] \ [subject matter ] \ [client] \ [ job number ]\ ....

What would then happen is that the cataloging features of whatever software that the photographer is using would be considered as the icing on the cake rather than the whole cake.

In my own case, instead of relying on star ratings of my images, I go so far as to create separate directories such as "intial selects", "final selects".

I regard it as folly to rely on a vendor's cataloging system, which is, after all, a proprietory database format susceptible to change.

1 upvote
Vam2004
By Vam2004 (5 months ago)

NO!

3 upvotes
srados
By srados (5 months ago)

"Adobe", what a person should do if his/hers computer IS NOT 24/7 connected to internet?I have my workhorse AWAY from viruses and other garbage. Keeping me disconnected saves me money in antivirus software...By the way I am boycotting subscription based software.Still happy with my CS 5...and yes when I can not install it on my new version of operating system software I will look up Corell line of products.

3 upvotes
Beppone
By Beppone (5 months ago)

@srados
Sry but using a professional system w/o antivirus software is a bit... yes, You know what I mean.

How do you get your (may be infected) files into that PC? How do you manage file handling w/o never ever using external storage media or the internet?

Cheers

0 upvotes
ventur
By ventur (5 months ago)

virus?? just stay away from porn sites, illegal downloads, suspicious sites, don't click on every link that you get in a email, and keep your software updated.

there's plenty of good free anti-virus, you even have "microsoft security essencials", that do a very good job

so get out of the 90's, there's no reason for you to keep the internet off

2 upvotes
Danny
By Danny (5 months ago)

@ventur
Stay away from porn sites.. Yeah, that's what most of us do.

0 upvotes
carrigman
By carrigman (5 months ago)

Srados: you do not have to be connected to the internet 24/7 to use PSCC. An attempt will be made to validate your licence once every 30 days so even if your'e online for only a few minutes per month it will be sufficient.

0 upvotes
Blasthoff
By Blasthoff (5 months ago)

Obviously the price is an "enticement" or come on. Ever since I realized the concept as a "wet dream" of Microsoft, I have feared the whole concept of "cloud" applications for years. Now it is here in it's infant stage. The concept of "having a hand in your pocket" has come full circle. You will not be able to fathom the full implication of this process until it is entrenched across the board. A scary thought.

My fears go beyond pricing, which is not to say it isn't enough of a concern. Putting all of ones eggs (tools) in one basket in the form of a "cloud" should be scaring the pants off of most folks. Your computers, in themselves, are nothing more then boat anchors without software. The whole concept is to make software and even the personal computer obsolete. What you will be left with are "services" and appliances to connect to them. Connectivity is all there will be and YOU WILL BE at the mercy of it, FOR EVERYTHING! Metered life with one universal kill switch.

NO THANKS!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (5 months ago)

I agree with you. Also, the day we get to the universal kill switch that you talk of is the day that many a government will be ever so happy; just think of the power they will have over their citizens (as if they haven't got enough already!)

0 upvotes
wireless
By wireless (5 months ago)

I don't get the thing about renting vs. buying. You end up with the same functionality at the same cost if you do regular upgrades. If you own property you must pay taxes on it, or the government will retrieve it back from you. That's a kind of renting. For the price of two Starbucks coffees a month I get $800 worth of software.

1 upvote
Danny
By Danny (5 months ago)

The BIG difference about renting vs buying is that I decide when I want to upgrade or not. I pay for the software and if I want to work with CS5 for 5 years, that's my choice. With renting, Adobe's hand is in your pocket, and it's pay time every month, if you want to upgrade or not. And if not, then you can't use their software. Do you still like the CC concept?

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
1 upvote
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

Danny,

Even if you upgrade every 5 years the cloud subscription method is still cheaper providing the monthly price doesn't change much (currently $10/mo). At $800-$850 for a retail copy, it would take a subscriber around 7 years before they end up forking over the same amount of money. If the price was $15/mo from the get go, it would take shy of 5 years to reach the same amount. Meanwhile, they stay current. And that is not even including the fact that Lightroom is included too. That would add another $150 to your starting costs. That would give the subscriber over 8 years at $10/mo and 5.5 years at $15/mo before breaking even with your onetime lump sum expense.

Keep in mind that the next version you might want to upgrade to might not be honored as meeting the upgrade requirements if Adobe deems your version of software is too old.

Not saying this is for everyone, but it can work out well for many others who are able to spend $10/mo but not $1,000 up front. Greater accessibility.

2 upvotes
highpriest
By highpriest (5 months ago)

Does anyone know how much it would cost per month after the first year?

0 upvotes
Simon Bradshaw
By Simon Bradshaw (5 months ago)

I asked Adobe's product manager on Twitter and got the following response:

"£8.78/month is the price in the UK. It won't double after the first year."

https://twitter.com/jtranber/status/404820061719781376

I'm not taking that as a "won't change" but it seems a pretty clear representation to me that the price won't greatly increase.

As for the security issue, I doubt that Adobe will let itself be bitten again. It's unfortunate that people and organisations generally fix security problems *after* they've been exploited, but as a rule they do then fix them, and often take an overdue look for any others.

1 upvote
richteed
By richteed (5 months ago)

There are some very angry and bitter posts on this stream .. lighten up people! I thought the CC pricing structure was pretty parasitic initially, but this latest offer of £8.78/month for PS & LR is just about affordable for me, so I've taken the plunge.
I've never been able to afford the software until now and relied on some very old versions of questionable provenance. Now I'm using the very latest software that I read about in the mags, an ACR that reads my camera's RAW files, and, as I spend about an hour a day in PS, paying about 30p/hour for the privilege. Not a bargain, but not a ripoff either.
Hopefully they won't hike the price too much after 12 months, but if they do, I can always go back to CS2.

4 upvotes
srados
By srados (5 months ago)

...good for you.

1 upvote
Mr Fartleberry
By Mr Fartleberry (5 months ago)

Someone's going to get fired for not meeting their 4Q sales projections. And then there's that bit about burning bridges with your customers standing on them.

9 upvotes
technofan
By technofan (5 months ago)

It's a good offer. You're not committed for life. If it's too much then leave at the end of your annual term. What's the worst that can happen? You lose around £110 (in my case). But that's having used the software for a year too. You can of course buy from somewhere else, but you would need to spend around £200 to get something as good as this. That equates to about a 2 year subscription.

What will make or break this deal is the price stability each year. A big hike in price would offend many non-business users and plenty of small business users alike.
Pete :-)

1 upvote
ChrisSwiss
By ChrisSwiss (5 months ago)

Adobe revealed their real nature and attitude, and that is how they will act on customers in the future. Even if they try to hide again now: Sorry, no love for you, Adobe.

13 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (5 months ago)

If only they had done that at the beginning...of course many signed up to CC for a lot more who did not own CS3...!

1 upvote
rsjoberg
By rsjoberg (5 months ago)

I've been using Photoshop and Lightroom since their first versions, but I'll move to Aperture now. It's optimized for the Retina display and will serve my present needs. I'll choose when I pay again.

7 upvotes
KeeChiuPeng
By KeeChiuPeng (5 months ago)

I fear my new signup account would be hacked.

9 upvotes
carrigman
By carrigman (5 months ago)

I think it's a very good offer and I have signed up. For €144 a year I have access to the best image editor there is with automatic updates as they arise. Already, ACR's Radial Filter and Automatic Perspective Correction - to name just two of CC's innovations- make it a very attractive option over previous versions. People may whinge about the concept of renting rather than owning the software but, like it or not, that is the way it's going to be and you either stick with your existing version of PS - which will become increasingly dated as time goes by - or you accept what Adobe are doing and go with the flow. Yes, you could also, of course, opt for another image editor but for me, I am so used to PS that a change was never a realistic proposition.

3 upvotes
AlexAmsterdam
By AlexAmsterdam (5 months ago)

Not to forget the Shake Reduction filter!

1 upvote
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (5 months ago)

@ AlexAmsterdam

Is that to reduce the rage induced tremors potential customers are having as a result of this Cloud nonsense?

:o)

0 upvotes
The Scurvy Dog of PR
By The Scurvy Dog of PR (5 months ago)

You mean the 'Shake Down filter'?

0 upvotes
Smeggypants
By Smeggypants (5 months ago)

I shall NEVER rent software. End of.

22 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (5 months ago)

You always do rent - the EULA means you never own it really and could probably be revoked by the owners.

1 upvote
ST205
By ST205 (5 months ago)

The difference being you pay once and rent it forever. You don't have to keep paying to use the software.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
18 upvotes
Mike Dobbs
By Mike Dobbs (5 months ago)

I'm about to move to LR but not if I must rent it. Anyone know of upcoming discounts on downloadable version?
I'm having to move from Corel's Aftershot Pro catalog/RAW Converter/Editting system since I've just picked up a new camera (Olympus E-M1) that has no converter yet in ASP and may be many months before it appears. I do not have PS...ASP & Corel PaintShopPro have suited me fine over the years....way lower cost as well.

0 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (5 months ago)

Can you not use the FREE Adobe DNG Converer to convert your E-M1 from .orf to .dng and then work on the .dng files in AsP?

0 upvotes
pekr
By pekr (5 months ago)

10USD, 12 EUR - what kind of idiot can set such conversion rate?

16 upvotes
carrigman
By carrigman (5 months ago)

The USD price quoted does not include local taxes.

0 upvotes
charliechappy
By charliechappy (5 months ago)

12,3 € = 16,67 US$
So you are saying local taxes make a +66% difference? Maybe you should've checked your schoolbook before spreading such nonsense.
We are talking about a DOWNLOAD. Not a real item which you'd have to ship around the world.
I personally wouldn't RENT that software if it would only cost me 5€/month. I would always feel trapped with no chance of getting out without big losses. I bought CS6 and will use it until either Adobe gets out of the cloud or I swap to a different software.

9 upvotes
bugbait
By bugbait (5 months ago)

The ease of reopening the image in raw as I go along as additional layers alone; was worth the $120. The Shake Reduction filter is subtle in most instances, best refining critical focus of hand held shots. Images mos of the way there but could use a bit more pop. The filters built in smoothing is better than going back into luminance reduction. Press Alt and click the Cancel button in the filter will reset it to its recommended settings for the given image. PS CC also seems a bit speedier than CS6 here and there. I like the idea of students being able to get their hands on skills rolling on the cheap, education is so terribly expensive these days. I gave a computer to a lady friend next door and she wants to learn a little Photoshopping, $120? Hmm yes, I think I just found her Christmas present.

1 upvote
Prognathous
By Prognathous (5 months ago)

It's not $120. It's $120 *per year* (and even that is the best case scenario). There's a big difference.

6 upvotes
MarcLee
By MarcLee (5 months ago)

The funny thing here is that so many people are claiming Creative Cloud is cheaper, while Adobe are introducing it to stabilise and maximise income. So something is not adding up.

I don't manipulate the content of my photos much, just the overall look. So Capture One is fine.

But thanks to the guy who introduced Photoline further down the page. It's worth giving them some support.

12 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (5 months ago)

I agree that Capture One is fine, but I go further and FOR ME, is actually much better than ACR. I switched recently and am getting much more accurate and richer colors 'out of the box' than with ACR 'acrobatics' I used to do. Mind you I recently started calibrating monitor but even then, it seems to me Capture One colors have a cleanliness (I find ACR smudgy), richness and texture that I am thrilled with. Considering that the Express version is only $99 dollars, makes it very good value also.

I also find PhotoNinja color processing excellent. My 2cents.

And I do have standalone CS6 for further editing if I need, as a plugin host also. If I ever need to due to OS compatibility, Paintshop Pro or GIMP will do for further editing.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
JordanAT
By JordanAT (5 months ago)

While Adobe (well, any company) is looking to maximize their profit, as a business gets more mature it looks to stabilize their revenue stream. To keep a marching army of 10,000+ employees requires a regular revenue stream. Having a revision even once a year means a large cash infusion which then tapers quickly. With rental, they even out their revenue stream considerably, which simplifies financial management. It also guarantees the continued support even in a "down" year (or poor release) - people pay the subscription instead of skipping a lackluster release.

0 upvotes
The Scurvy Dog of PR
By The Scurvy Dog of PR (5 months ago)

You just made our case for 'NOT' subscribing. Some of us don't care that software development has it's ups and downs. It's the nature of the biz. Those 'lackluster updates is why some of us skipped updating in the first place. Innovation is driven by the potential of a boost in sales. To flatten out that revenue stream guarantees there will be less motivation to innovation because you have taken away the stimulus to do so. This is NOT a win/win situation. It was driven by corporate greed. Nothing else. I will NEVER buy another Adobe product.

0 upvotes
SiriusDoggy
By SiriusDoggy (5 months ago)

OK, I have a couple questions. Right now I have Photoshop CS5.5 and Lightroom 5. If I decide to go with this deal and then after a few months or the first year when they jack up the rates, will I be able to cancel and go back to my "old" version of the software?

If yes, will any PS files I made in PScc be able to be opened in PS5.5?

Can PS5.5 and PScc both be installed on the computer? And LR5.5 and LRcc?

0 upvotes
Prognathous
By Prognathous (5 months ago)

The answer to your second question is a resounding NO. You will not be able to edit PS files created with CC with your old version.

I'm not sure if side by side installation is possible, but even if it is, if you use the new version and want to switch back, you better convert the files while you still have a CC license.

5 upvotes
SiriusDoggy
By SiriusDoggy (5 months ago)

Thanks for the response.
So a PSD file is not a PSD file? I mean right now I have PSD files that were edited on CS3 or CS4 that I can open and edit in CS5.5.
I realize that's going forward and not backwards, I just assumed it was a standard format that was interchangeable.
Anyone have a PScc file I can test to see it it will open in PSCS5.5?

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Gary Goodenough
By Gary Goodenough (5 months ago)

Some new feature are not backwards compatible, such as non-distructive crop in CS6.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (5 months ago)

They are not reducing their prices or expanding this offer out of kindness. Think, people.

I am not renting my software.

16 upvotes
JordanAT
By JordanAT (5 months ago)

That's fine, but they won't sell it to you either. Enjoy your new photo editing software, whatever it turns out to be.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (5 months ago)

And there is where their supporters' argument fails. There is no reason not to allow the option if you really think the renting is an automatic better alternative for the customer.

Meanwhile, maybe you could consider THIS car ...

A brickable vehicle . Adobe may cross market

boingboing.net/2013/11/13/renault-ships-a-brickable-car.html

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Deleted pending purge
By Deleted pending purge (5 months ago)

Nice future indeed. Car Hackers is going to be quite a lucrative field... :(

0 upvotes
Karl Summers
By Karl Summers (5 months ago)

This deal is so good I signed up twice.

7 upvotes
Marcin 3M
By Marcin 3M (5 months ago)

Go for the third.
Don't loose opportunity.

1 upvote
taojones
By taojones (5 months ago)

I like it I have a behance site now which was due for payment so I get a year of free PS and LR. Jeezus it is only the price of two coffees, are all you guys living in a third world country...

4 upvotes
Danny
By Danny (5 months ago)

Nothing is free in this world, and you can count on it this is very strategic and tactic move from Adobe. Let's see in three years from now if you can still can buy two coffees from the price you have to pay to use this software… That is, if Adobe CC survives that long..

5 upvotes
Prognathous
By Prognathous (5 months ago)

If you're willing to commit to paying $120 a year for the rest of your life for a specific software product (or have editing access to your files held hostage by Adobe), then by all means do it. Many of us don't want to make this commitment under these terms, even if we can afford it.

5 upvotes
rarufu
By rarufu (5 months ago)

It will cost 20-30 $ or € x month after that 12 Months and i don't get it how easy it will be to get out of the ABO then.
Can it be canncelled at anytime ?

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Andrew53
By Andrew53 (5 months ago)

Someone finds a way to migrate my LR work to different software and I'm gone.

3 upvotes
Johan1967
By Johan1967 (5 months ago)

You can just buy LR as before. What is the problem?

1 upvote
MarcLee
By MarcLee (5 months ago)

The problem is you can't trust Adobe. They changed terms unilaterally before. They can do it again.

12 upvotes
Mark Alan Thomas
By Mark Alan Thomas (5 months ago)

Capture One Pro has a new Lr import feature which preserves basic edits such as metadata, exposure, white balance, cropping, etc. Last I checked, it was still in beta form, but it’s worth looking into.

3 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (5 months ago)

And why on earth are photographers using Lr database facilities when the database format is, as far as I am aware (correct me if I am wrong), not an open standard.

That seems daft beyond belief to me; by using the Lr database (a.k.a. Catalog, and internal edits) a photographer is already locking themseleves into Adobe long before this Cloud thing came into being.

Whey not simply use a reasonably organised directory structure to store your images e.g. \ [year] \ [project name] \ [ edits ]

3 upvotes
Gary Goodenough
By Gary Goodenough (5 months ago)

To keep from getting locked in and dependent upon Lightroom, I organize by directory (folder) and use Lightroom to apply/edit metadata in sidecar files. I do not use the Lightroom Develop module.

0 upvotes
Model Mike
By Model Mike (4 months ago)

> And why on earth are photographers
> using Lr database facilities when the database
> format is, as far as I am aware (correct me if I am
> wrong), not an open standard.

It uses SqlLite, which is public domain.

0 upvotes
JohnyP
By JohnyP (5 months ago)

Of course they are doing this because they care about the photographers... and not because no one needs their overpriced, cloud locked software.

It was a bad deal then and it is till a bad deal.

16 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (5 months ago)

This rather does suggest that early adopters got screwed. Adobe does not care.

7 upvotes
David Rossberg
By David Rossberg (5 months ago)

This is a great deal, Adobe finally did something reasonable and ppl are still complaining.

5 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

That's because you're in the minority that thinks it's reasonable. The rest, however, can see that it is not.

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
24 upvotes
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

The 1 million+ subscribers that Adobe currently has, which includes the 331,000+ people that subscribed in the past quarter disagree with your comment.

3 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

And the many more millions that collectively choose to use the alternatives, disagree with yours :-D

13 upvotes
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

But unlike you, I have a number, a hard figure provided in the quarterly financials. What do you have? An inflated guesstimate, a head count?

Those that like to troll, people who aren't interested to begin with, and those that can't afford to play don't have a voice in the matter.

Trolls don't have a voice for obvious reasons.

People who aren't interested to begin with don't have a voice since they are not potential customers. IE, my grandmother has no interest in PS since it is not going to help her make quilts.

And those that can't afford to play shouldn't be taken seriously either. Those who can only afford to drive a Fiesta shouldn't be complaining about the cost of a Ferrari. Or...those you can only afford a hamburger shouldn't be expecting a steak.

Which one of these three do you fall into?

4 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

I don't fall into any of them, rather I fall into the one you missed out because it didn't occur to you: I fall into the category of those that have a fully-functioning brain.

As I said in another post, enjoy your digital shackles because if nothing else, at the very least it sounds quite kinky :-D

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
18 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (5 months ago)

Seems the Adobe shills are getting aggressive. They reduce this price because they have to. Not because they are kind.

8 upvotes
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

Who said you couldn't have a brain and still fall into one of those categories? So no, it didn't fail to occur to me.

While I do question your brain functionality by rehashing a lame Apple sheep joke, that is besides the point. Brain or not, my point is I question your intentions. Looking at your past comments and your profile status you contribute little more than comments to stir the pot. There is little backing to your claims, no rhyme to your reasoning, nor how the topic involves you.

Again you are mistaken on the subscription process, it is no more being in shackles than you are with a cell or cable provider. You choose ahead of time what you are getting into and, upon renewal, can make a choice to stay or leave with no penalties to you. I keep my photos and work and would already know who I would be switching to if I decide to leave them. Meanwhile, I will be able keep my productivity up at a fraction of what it would cost for a full retail copy. I see nothing wrong with that.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (5 months ago)

Then you should have no reason to be angry if Adobe offered a CHOICE. In your answers to pumeco, you duck this. The reason to suck people into subscription models is that the software is mature and no new breakthroughs, likely to pull people into upgrading, are likely. And that is no bargain.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
8 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

VirtualMirage, the only reason I don't answer all the questions is because there's little point in arguing the toss with anyone who is prepared to pay out a constant stream of cash for something they will NEVER own.

Why can't you grasp that?

Comparing it to a phone contract is beyond stupidity. You were able to buy a one-time licence before, and therefore, you ought to still have the option to buy one now. I can imagine there are businesses extremely pleased with this model, but for the rest it's just a cash-milking machine.

They are not giving you the choice, THAT is the problem.

As for Apple (another greed-machine), there is no such thing as a lame Apple joke. Every Apple joke I've ever seen serves a purpose; to warn people that they are effectively about to pay a company to shackle them.

Anyone who CHOOSES to PAY TO BE SHACKLED is not on the same intellectual level as those that choose not to.

Use RawTherapee; cheaper, better, faster than Lightroom - NO SHACKLES INVOLVED!!!

4 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (5 months ago)

@VirtualMirage

Do you work for, or have shares in,Adobe (or any enterprise that benefits from an association with Adobe)?

Serious question,not intended to be antagonistic (I am just curious as you are doing so much to defend them in comment after comment after comment).

0 upvotes
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

Plevyadophy,

I don't work for nor have any shares in Adobe. I do work in the IT industry and I am very familiar with how a subscription service works in that field. Plus I am familiar with how EULA licenses work when you BUY a product and that it isn't true ownership. I am also familiar that majority of the people do upgrade their software, some more than others. Because of all three of the above, I do not harbor any fear or anger at a company that is choosing to go to a subscription model so long as the pricing is fair. For $10 a month for two programs and more, I do feel that is fair. Especially so when offered as a retail product only, I felt the cost was more than I was willing to pay up front.

My acts of defense is more so playing devil's advocate. When too many complain against it without giving a thorough, balanced, explanation then I feel compelled to show the other side of the story or at least give corrections to others misinformation. Nothing more.

0 upvotes
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

GaryJP,

I've never said I would be angry if Adobe offered a choice. IF they did, that would be great too. That is something I have never ducked. But to attack a subscription model and then to label those who don't fear it as sheep is just ignorant and childish.

The idea of subscription models has many reasons, some good and some bad. One, is a constant stream of income versus influxes when new versions are released for the company. Two, it'll make piracy much more difficult which is a big cost factor to both the company and to legitimate people that buy the product. I have a feeling that number two plays a big factor in Adobe's choice. But these are just a few reasons.

As for questioning whether it is a bargain, that will depend on the individual. If you never upgrade, which I doubt, it isn't. If you upgrade every few years, you might break even several years down the road. If you upgrade all the time, it's a steal.

0 upvotes
Mike Dantignac
By Mike Dantignac (5 months ago)

VirtualMirage,

I'm in IT too. Some of our engineering applications and definitely some of our enterprise IT applications are on a subscription model. You don't pay you don't play. The software maker and your VAR will not care if you don't think it's fair. Some of the license servers we have phone home and will break if your subscription isn't paid. It sucks especially when a purchase req. is late or the new terms are stuck with legal for a few extra days. But if those are the tools you want and/or need. You pay the cost to be the boss or use the alternative. This deal isn't bad for people that want to pay to play. I will enjoy it for a year. :)

1 upvote
Richard Townsend
By Richard Townsend (5 months ago)

Never trust Adobe again.

It's not just that once you stop paying you can't use the software.

From Adobe's Terms and Conditions:

6.4 Adobe may modify or discontinue, temporarily or permanently, the Services or Materials, or any portion thereof, with or without notice. You agree that Adobe shall not be liable to you or anyone else if we do so.

So they can permanently discontinue the service at any time and there's nothing you can do about it!

CS6 can handle my current cameras fine and I've now purchased Capture One Pro 7, so no new Adobe products for me.

24 upvotes
dmanthree
By dmanthree (5 months ago)

True, but what are the chances they'll ever do that? Zero. This is likely some "lawyer speak" crap they included to cover their butts for some strange reason. I wouldn't worry about this.

2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (5 months ago)

You don't need "lawyer speak" crap for something that is guaranteed to never happen.

5 upvotes
JordanAT
By JordanAT (5 months ago)

I'm happy they've opened it up. Right now I'm upgrading nearly every cycle for Lightroom at about $100 a pop. Until I got a (Very) cheap student version of PS 5.5, I was dropping another $50-$100 or so on PS Elements every year or two. So for the same money I'm already paying, I'm getting both with regular updates.

What happens when I leave? Well, in theory I lose my editable versions, but I still have my jpg finals. In practice most other major players support, at least to some extent, the psd format, so either I'll stop editing entirely (and the psds won't matter) or I'll go to a format where I can probably import most of the work for the rare case where I'm re-editing old photos.

2 upvotes
PicOne
By PicOne (5 months ago)

Adobe doesn't say you'll get LR6 in this plan. It only says LR5 (and updates to such). LR6 wouldn't be an update to LR5.

1 upvote
JDOnrust
By JDOnrust (5 months ago)

Hey, Adobe, listen to this: i. Don.t. Want. It.

I want PS on my Mac. Period.

9 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

Adobe had a little lamb, her fleece was white as snow.
And everywhere where 'dobe went the sheep were sure to go!

19 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

BTW, I'm expecting LOTS of likes for that poem, I deserve it after all the like buttons I've been pressing here lately. I bet I'm not the only one with yellow fingers!

1 upvote
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

An hour and not a single like, you're just doing it to make me look bad, ah well, that sucks. Ok it doesn't suck as much as Adobe sucks, but it still sucks.

Ah well, I'm bored of you all now so I'm off to play with PhotoLine that I just downloaded - looks very capable.

Here's the link if you don't know what it is (I didn't until I found out about it just today):

http://www.pl32.com

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
BaldCol
By BaldCol (5 months ago)

Adobes recent security breach affected at least 38 million users. Think about that number. 38 million users, 37,999,950 of whom have not commented on here. That's a lot of woolly jumpers. Baaaaaaa... baaaaaa....

5 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

'tis, isn't it?

I'll let you into a secret here, just between us two mind you. That poem, it was actually written for an Apple-related thread, I just changed the name from Apple to Adobe.

But then I thought, nah, why save it for an Apple thread when there are much funnier gags already available for those:

http://todaysindividual.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/f34b8_isheep.jpg

Anyway, have fun with your Adobe shackles, it does sound kinda kinky ;-)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Mark3M
By Mark3M (5 months ago)

Are they desperate, or what? CC is collapsing.

Hold on. Subscription is going away, along with upper management.

9 upvotes
The Scurvy Dog of PR
By The Scurvy Dog of PR (5 months ago)

Hope springs eternal.

0 upvotes
RobertSigmund
By RobertSigmund (5 months ago)

"Rent" is the wrong term anyway - extort would be more appropriate. If you rent a flat, for example, you really have something, all the time, and the landlord cannot let it to somebody else. With this software, though, you get a product and once you got it, the cost for the company is quasi nil! Unless you believe their promises of constant upgrading, of course.

8 upvotes
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

Then by your description, your landlord is extorting you. Your flat isn't yours to keep, you don't get to walk away with it if you stop paying rent. If you stop paying rent, you get kicked out. You stop your subscription, you no longer get to use the product. Simple.

3 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

Not really, the difference is that before you could pay and keep the product, but now they're forcing a neverending commitment in order to use it.

So, to reiterate what every other wise person has said - screw 'em - you don't need 'em anyway.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

You didn't purchase to flat out own the product in the past, that is a misconception. You only acquired a license to use, not a license to own, for a single version of software. Read the license agreements to get the full story.

The product you describe is a version that loses support, no longer receives updates, doesn't support newer RAWs, becomes incompatible with newer hardware and OS, etc. Yet you throw down a large lump sum of money up front for this. Did you save any money by going this route?

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (5 months ago)

Yes, I do, I always purchase to flat-out own or I don't purchase. The technicality of it being a "licence" makes no difference in real terms, the point is I could have purchased Photoshop for over £500 if I was so inclined, but at least I would never have to pay further if I had not wanted to.

It's called choice, and you can no longer purchase such a licence.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
RobertSigmund
By RobertSigmund (5 months ago)

Virtual Image: My landlord constantly lets me the square meters I rent. He cannot use them in any other way. He cannot live there, he cannot let it to anybody else, he cannot set up a photostudio there, nothing. Now compare this with the software "rent". I hope you see the difference, because I would not know how to express this even clearer.

3 upvotes
VirtualMirage
By VirtualMirage (5 months ago)

The difference is you are talking about physical piece of property that can only be occupied one at a time versus a software product that can be distributed and used by many while not stepping on others toes, so I don't see it as a good direct comparison. But both are forms of rent.

Following your statement to a tee, you are saying that Adobe should only allow one person at a time to rent the software. Something lost in translation?

Rent (verb): Pay someone for the use of.

This can be a piece of property, a car, a physical object, movies, even software or services.

While I prefer the term subscription service, it does fall within the definition guidelines of what rent is.

For those like me that work in IT, this is nothing new and is considered the norm. I don't see anything wrong with it providing it is reasonably priced, which I feel it is. For everyone else, it may seem foreign. But it isn't much different than a cellular service, cable provider, internet service provider, etc.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 625
12345