adobe vs cakewalk . subscription the wrong, and right way

Cost, the cloud, the walled garden, internet access and trust are all topics raised against Adobe with the cancellation of Lightroom standalone.

they all valid, and some are more powerful than others, and some can be mitigated but at the end of the day you can subscribe for 1 month, 12 months or pay for 10 years and never actually posses a perpetual license. if you stop paying, you lose your work.

i would encourage a comparison to Cakewalk Sonar.. 2 years ago they introduced a subscription model, and honestly have produced monthly updates and improvements.. but there is a twist...

with Cakewalk, once you have subscribed for 12 consecutive months, your installation becomes a perpetual license at the point in time you cease subscription..you simply do not get further updates.

this model is perfectly reasonable.. take a year off, or two, use your old version when and if you need, or pay for a new annual subscription for updates and again retain a perpetual license at the end.

if Adobe had adopted, or would change to this model, I would think that the furore would subside.. but as it is, after using LR from 1.0, I refuse for either myself or my photos to be a hostage

From what I see on the Cakewalk site, you pay for the product once off as you normally would, get updates monthly for 12 months and updates stop after that. There's no monthly fee that I can see.

Can be a little risky if issues aren't resolved, or if on the 12th month update, an issue arose (a bug or stability issue). A small risk for sure but if a company had integrity they'd allow you a 13th or more update for free until the issue is resolved, without expectation of buying the software again. This would be fair and be seen to be fair and the right thing to do, I would think.

I still use Sonar X2 with Win7 64. No issues whatsoever.

Similar to Cakewalk is ACDSEE (I had Ultimate 8 but now have Ultimate 10). You buy the software outright, you get updates here and there and at some stage they revise to a new version and stop updating the previous version. If you want the new version, you pay the upgrade price. If the current version suits you, no problem.

With ACDSEE though, a newer version seems to appear a little too quick for my taste, however, I can see the company need for it, to keep things 'appearing' fresh for existing customers and for new customers. Sometimes the upgrade to a new version isn't worth it, hence me skipping a version. I have to say, though, ACDSEE's pricing is more than reasonable and fair when on sale.

I agree with you that Adobe has it all wrong.

Cakewalk has seriously upped their game since x2, so I can heartily recommend upgrading to Sonar platinum.. in particular their ability to squish bugs.

Funnily enough I had started a thread at cakewalk on exactly the situation you describe and CW themselves stated a hotfix or another month would be granted..pretty ethical

cheers, ian

Mystic38 said:

Cost, the cloud, the walled garden, internet access and trust are all topics raised against Adobe with the cancellation of Lightroom standalone.

they all valid, and some are more powerful than others, and some can be mitigated but at the end of the day you can subscribe for 1 month, 12 months or pay for 10 years and never actually posses a perpetual license. if you stop paying, you lose your work.

Click to expand...

Why do so many punters get this wrong?

Mystic38 said:

i would encourage a comparison to Cakewalk Sonar.. 2 years ago they introduced a subscription model, and honestly have produced monthly updates and improvements.. but there is a twist...

with Cakewalk, once you have subscribed for 12 consecutive months, your installation becomes a perpetual license at the point in time you cease subscription..you simply do not get further updates.

this model is perfectly reasonable.. take a year off, or two, use your old version when and if you need, or pay for a new annual subscription for updates and again retain a perpetual license at the end.

if Adobe had adopted, or would change to this model, I would think that the furore would subside.. but as it is, after using LR from 1.0, I refuse for either myself or my photos to be a hostage

Click to expand...

Sonar is a bad example of high tech software because they have zero support other than whoever happens to be hanging out in the forum, which is not very many people these days. Has everyone gone over to Pro Tools? No chat, no 1800 line, nothing. I go clear back to CPA days with a Turtle Beach sound card and in those days you could get someone on the phone at Cakewalk who would actually know how to fix your issue, and there were a great many issues back in the day. IRQ thrashing anyone? And now, come to think of it. Midi/audio recording is probably among the world's most fiendishly complicated software. Photoshop is a walk in the park by comparison.

Adobe tech support is virtually instant and they keep after you for days until you've told a rep on the phone that your issue has been resolved. If need be, the chat tech will go into your computer and add and delete files until the program is installed and running correctly. That my friends is excellent customer service.

Your photos will never be "held hostage" if you don't upload them, nor will they magically become locked up if you decide not to continue your subscription.

Reilly Diefenbach said:

Your photos will never be "held hostage" if you don't upload them, nor will they magically become locked up if you decide not to continue your subscription.

Click to expand...

True, however, you will lose editing or re-editing ability unless you pay. And that is the single-most fundamental problem that many people have with 'renting' software.

At least if I have software that is 100% mine I can use it for 10 years straight, updates or no updates. I've got software that still runs from yr 2000 with no issues. Try using LR or PS if you don't pay up the next month, let alone 10yrs. Big difference.

Now imagine if the OS is rented month to month. All hell will break loose.

Mystic38 said:

Cost, the cloud, the walled garden, internet access and trust are all topics raised against Adobe with the cancellation of Lightroom standalone.

they all valid, and some are more powerful than others, and some can be mitigated but at the end of the day you can subscribe for 1 month, 12 months or pay for 10 years and never actually posses a perpetual license. if you stop paying, you lose your work.

i would encourage a comparison to Cakewalk Sonar.. 2 years ago they introduced a subscription model, and honestly have produced monthly updates and improvements.. but there is a twist...

with Cakewalk, once you have subscribed for 12 consecutive months, your installation becomes a perpetual license at the point in time you cease subscription..you simply do not get further updates.

this model is perfectly reasonable.. take a year off, or two, use your old version when and if you need, or pay for a new annual subscription for updates and again retain a perpetual license at the end.

if Adobe had adopted, or would change to this model, I would think that the furore would subside.. but as it is, after using LR from 1.0, I refuse for either myself or my photos to be a hostage

Click to expand...

There is a big difference, though: Adobe has a virtual monopoly - Cakewalk doesn't. Cakewalk (Sonar) is a small player in a market dominated by ProTools and Cubase. So, Cakewalk's great business proposition (basically a rent-to-own) is dictated by need and nothing else: like Adobe, they figured that lowering the cost of entry would be attractive to consumers - the only difference being that a small player like Sonar (Cakewalk) needed to 'sweeten the pot', while Adobe doesn't.

Remember that the subscription model has been enormously successful for Adobe while providing a reasonable cure for piracy, so why should Adobe change a winning formula in order to accommodate a tiny minority?

The key to understanding this issue is to realize that most people are happy with the $10/month they pay for the subscription, feeling it's a great bargain (versus paying $800 and $120 upfront for Photoshop and Lightroom, plus upgrades every two years) and that if things go wrong in the future (insert a problem of your choice here), they will just switch to something else. They figure that "until the sh^t hits the fan", they will enjoy the ride.

There is also a good possibility that 'catastrophe' never happens and Adobe keeps the price of the membership low and lots of people remain subscribed.

Blaklynx01 said:

Blaklynx01 said:

Your photos will never be "held hostage" if you don't upload them, nor will they magically become locked up if you decide not to continue your subscription.

Click to expand...

True, however, you will lose editing or re-editing ability unless you pay. And that is the single-most fundamental problem that many people have with 'renting' software.

At least if I have software that is 100% mine I can use it for 10 years straight, updates or no updates. I've got software that still runs from yr 2000 with no issues. Try using LR or PS if you don't pay up the next month, let alone 10yrs. Big difference.

Click to expand...

Very true: the big problem with subscription models is that you can't use the product or service once you stop paying.

Knowing that, consumers are faced with the task of deciding if that particular (and major) drawback is enough to offset the benefits.

In the case of the Adobe subscription, most people feel that the pluses are much greater than the minuses:

You get Photoshop ($800) plus Lightroom ($120) for $10 today and keep on paying $10/month for however long you want. After, say, 5 years, you will have spent $600 for access to the consensus best post-processing tool package in the industry (the Lightroom/Photoshop combo). The 'traditional' alternative would be to buy outright, in which case, at the end of the same 5 years you would have invested $920 plus a couple of upgrades (roughly $600 total) : $1520 vs $600.

Most people look at that as a very attractive offer, thinking that, if worst comes to worst, they can just switch to something else at the end of the 5 years (or first, second, third year, whatever), without losing money. In the mean time, they have access to the 'latest and greatest' for a modest fee.

Turtle beach sound cards and Iraq conflicts?..lol Seriously, bringing up issues from 15 years ago?..

You grudge much?

It really is ok to quit the deflection statements.. you fully understand the difference between a perpetual license to use the software and what adobe gives you when you stop paying.

..a mathematical model that relies 100% on the assumption that every photographer wants photoshop. They don't.

That is also not the point.. there are subscription models that leave you with something when you have paid your 12 months. Let me put it this way..

adobe = renting / leasing

cakewalk = installment plan of 12 month minimum

both are subscription.. one is customer friendly, one is not.

Mystic38 said:

Turtle beach sound cards and Iraq IRQ conflicts?..lol Seriously, bringing up issues from 15 years ago?..

Click to expand...

25 years ago :^)

Mystic38 said:

You grudge much?

Click to expand...

You misunderstand. CPA 4.0 was a good program once you got it to work on your 486DX, but that took a bit of support. Support completely absent from Sonar.

Mystic38 said:

It really is ok to quit the deflection statements.. you fully understand the difference between a perpetual license to use the software and what adobe gives you when you stop paying.

Click to expand...

Yes, I do but many apparently don't if the silly "hostage" verbiage is any indication. Simply export your pics with all your edits to your wonderful new program. No need for the cloud. I certainly will never use the cloud.

Mystic38 said:

..a mathematical model that relies 100% on the assumption that every photographer wants photoshop. They don't.

Click to expand...

Of course, not - that's why I clearly stated "most people" in my post above. But why deal with the truth, right?

Mystic38 said:

That is also not the point.. there are subscription models that leave you with something when you have paid your 12 months. Let me put it this way..

adobe = renting / leasing

cakewalk = installment plan of 12 month minimum

both are subscription.. one is customer friendly, one is not.

Click to expand...

Once again: every user has to do his own calculations.

A factor often overlooked is that people keep paying for upgrades no matter what. So, the 5-year or 10-year cost of a traditional license purchase is much higher than some users naively think.

How many people here are using Lightroom 1.0 or Bibble Pro or Aperture or Lightzone 1.0 (when it was commercial) or Capture 1.0? ACDSEe is at version 15 or so. How much have users paid over the years? Who is using DxO 1.0 instead of looking forward to paying some more for DxO 12?

The truth is we keep upgrading, we keep replacing computers, cameras, lenses...and software! (Try using your 'original' license of any software to develop your new camera's raw files and tell me what happens to your "buy once" theory!).

We keep on spending. Even if we don't realize it.

The idea of 'pay once - use forever' is just a transparent lie. We pay forever, no matter what. The question is not "IF", but "HOW" or "WHEN" we pay. Either way, we keep on paying in order to have the latest and greatest. At least, most people do. It's not 100% (just in case you want to make the same argument...lol).

And you know what? 5 years from now, nobody will want to develop their files with their beloved, *purchased* Lightroom 6 or DxO 12 - they will want DxO 17 because....we want the best for our raw files...and that has a cost that goes way beyond the initial purchase of a single license. Let's not fool ourselves...

Mystic38 said:

cakewalk = installment plan of 12 month minimum

both are subscription.. one is customer friendly, one is not.

Click to expand...

Btw, Cakewalk is doing something very simple: it splits the price of their software($499) into 12 Installments, adds a $100 finance surcharge and the user ends up paying $600 for the $500 product after one year ($50/month). From there, upgrades require more payments...for as long as you want or need those upgrades.

'Bad boy' Adobe has far friendlier terms: the initial 1-year cost is just a fraction of the purchase price: $120 vs $950.

If you want to go away from Cakewalk after the first year, you are on the hook for 120% of what the software sells for. If you want to go away from Adobe, you are on the hook for roughly 15% of the software's price.

Cakewalk calls it what it is: rent to own - with a 20% finance charge (like 35% APR!!!!) added to your purchase price.

Not exactly a good deal. You'd be better off buying outright for $499 and putting it on a credit card...if you can do the numbers...

irv00 said:

Mystic38 said:

cakewalk = installment plan of 12 month minimum

both are subscription.. one is customer friendly, one is not.

Click to expand...

Btw, Cakewalk is doing something very simple: it splits the price of their software($499) into 12 Installments, adds a $100 finance surcharge and the user ends up paying $600 for the $500 product after one year ($50/month). From there, upgrades require more payments...for as long as you want or need those upgrades.

'Bad boy' Adobe has far friendlier terms: the initial 1-year cost is just a fraction of the purchase price: $120 vs $950.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the drill down. I used to use Sonar Producer and paid I think $600, mostly for a fair amount of fluff features and some seriously awful sound collections and one or two good ones. Sonar Artist for a hundred bucks which I use now is the better deal for most, if anybody is interested :^)

irv00 said:

If you want to go away from Cakewalk after the first year, you are on the hook for 120% of what the software sells for. If you want to go away from Adobe, you are on the hook for roughly 15% of the software's price.

Cakewalk calls it what it is: rent to own - with a 20% finance charge added to your purchase price.

Not exactly a good deal. You'd be better off buying outright for $499 and putting it on a credit card...if you can do the numbers...

Click to expand...

Sonar kind of ran out of features to add years ago, so most might as well run it into the ground.

Reilly Diefenbach said:

Reilly Diefenbach said:

Thanks for the drill down. I used to use Sonar Producer and paid I think $600, mostly for a fair amount of fluff features and some seriously awful sound collections

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Please, don't get me started on the 'Anderton Collection'...rotflmao!

I do give them credit for finding a way to fool their users into thinking that financing their purchase of Sonar at a 35% APR is a "friendly deal"...

I knew Craig at Penn back in the sixties. A good guitar player way before I was. He's had an enviable career and as far as I can tell never had a boring job.

Reilly Diefenbach said:

Yes, I do but many apparently don't if the silly "hostage" verbiage is any indication. Simply export your pics with all your edits to your wonderful new program.

Click to expand...

Yes. Will this entail some inconveniences? Of course, but they aren't that serious.

And the far more important issue is that all your data of any kind is at risk, regardless of the licensing model of the software that created it or manages it. No app is guaranteed to be usable forever, so we all need to have a plan for how we will migrate data we want to keep, throughout our lifetimes and beyond, if we think that data will matter to anyone after we croak. (As photos might.)

I've migrated all my pictures from one management system (which I bought on a perpetual license) to another once already in my life, and I'm about 95% sure I'll have to do it again at least once or twice more. I've migrated my emails half a dozen times (all my email apps were bought on perpetual licenses, but that didn't stop some of them from becoming useless in any practical sense).

That's life with computers. If you don't have a plan for how you will migrate your data if you ever need to, you're blowing it.

Reilly Diefenbach said:

irv00 said:

Mystic38 said:

cakewalk = installment plan of 12 month minimum

both are subscription.. one is customer friendly, one is not.

Click to expand...

Btw, Cakewalk is doing something very simple: it splits the price of their software($499) into 12 Installments, adds a $100 finance surcharge and the user ends up paying $600 for the $500 product after one year ($50/month). From there, upgrades require more payments...for as long as you want or need those upgrades.

'Bad boy' Adobe has far friendlier terms: the initial 1-year cost is just a fraction of the purchase price: $120 vs $950.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the drill down. I used to use Sonar Producer and paid I think $600, mostly for a fair amount of fluff features and some seriously awful sound collections and one or two good ones. Sonar Artist for a hundred bucks which I use now is the better deal for most, if anybody is interested :^)

Reilly Diefenbach said:

If you want to go away from Cakewalk after the first year, you are on the hook for 120% of what the software sells for. If you want to go away from Adobe, you are on the hook for roughly 15% of the software's price.

Cakewalk calls it what it is: rent to own - with a 20% finance charge added to your purchase price.

Not exactly a good deal. You'd be better off buying outright for $499 and putting it on a credit card...if you can do the numbers...

Click to expand...

Sonar kind of ran out of features to add years ago, so most might as well run it into the ground.

Click to expand...

Actually no.. totally off topic but Cakewalk has added more features in the last 12-15 months than they did from 8.5>x3.. as well as fundamentally rewrite the audio for (dang near) gapless performance.. ripple editing, take lanes, speed comping.. it truly is now a massive step beyond where it was only 2-3 years ago

irv00 said:

Mystic38 said:

cakewalk = installment plan of 12 month minimum

both are subscription.. one is customer friendly, one is not.

Click to expand...

Btw, Cakewalk is doing something very simple: it splits the price of their software($499) into 12 Installments, adds a $100 finance surcharge and the user ends up paying $600 for the $500 product after one year ($50/month). From there, upgrades require more payments...for as long as you want or need those upgrades.

'Bad boy' Adobe has far friendlier terms: the initial 1-year cost is just a fraction of the purchase price: $120 vs $950.

If you want to go away from Cakewalk after the first year, you are on the hook for 120% of what the software sells for. If you want to go away from Adobe, you are on the hook for roughly 15% of the software's price.

Cakewalk calls it what it is: rent to own - with a 20% finance charge (like 35% APR!!!!) added to your purchase price.

Not exactly a good deal. You'd be better off buying outright for $499 and putting it on a credit card...if you can do the numbers...

https://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SONAR/Buy-Now/SONAR-Platinum#start

Click to expand...

Yet again, another smoke and mirrors comparison..

Rent Sonar for one year, pay for the version you want (from $9.99/mo > $49.99/mo) and after 12 months granted a perpetual license... or buy it for cheaper..sure.

use it as long as it runs on Windows.. which incidentally is still able to run more than 10 year old versions of Sonar as of now.

Continue to rent Sonar for 50% discount if you want updates ongoing. Come back one year later if you want and its still only the 50%

Stop paying?.. you have left a 100% fully functional DAW as good as the last time you used it.

Rent lightroom for one year, pay for stuff you dont need (PS) and use it only for as long as you keep paying. Stop paying ?.. Do you have fully functional Lightroom?.. hell no

When you stop paying, with one product you still have it, the other, you dont.. and pretending otherwise is disengenous

Mystic38 said:

irv00 said:

Mystic38 said:

cakewalk = installment plan of 12 month minimum

both are subscription.. one is customer friendly, one is not.

Click to expand...

Btw, Cakewalk is doing something very simple: it splits the price of their software($499) into 12 Installments, adds a $100 finance surcharge and the user ends up paying $600 for the $500 product after one year ($50/month). From there, upgrades require more payments...for as long as you want or need those upgrades.

'Bad boy' Adobe has far friendlier terms: the initial 1-year cost is just a fraction of the purchase price: $120 vs $950.

If you want to go away from Cakewalk after the first year, you are on the hook for 120% of what the software sells for. If you want to go away from Adobe, you are on the hook for roughly 15% of the software's price.

Cakewalk calls it what it is: rent to own - with a 20% finance charge (like 35% APR!!!!) added to your purchase price.

Not exactly a good deal. You'd be better off buying outright for $499 and putting it on a credit card...if you can do the numbers...

https://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SONAR/Buy-Now/SONAR-Platinum#start

Click to expand...

Yet again, another smoke and mirrors comparison..

Rent Sonar for one year, pay for the version you want (from $9.99/mo > $49.99/mo) and after 12 months granted a perpetual license... or buy it for cheaper..sure.

Click to expand...

It's all there in the link I provided:

$499 if you pay at once.

Or $49.99 per month. Total cost for your rent-to-own investment: $600. You're paying 35% APR on your $499 purchase. Not smart. At all.

Why do we need more posts on the same subject? This forum is being ruined.

If you, or anyone, wants to provide a comparison like this one, please do your research first. Misrepresenting how LR works does no one a service, as other posts here have noted.

(You don't lose your work. You lose the ability to do new develop-module work. Keywording and similar work can actually continue.)

Marc Rochkind