Adobe slashes Creative Cloud school pricing to just $5 per user per year

""Someone below made the point that most of his teams don't use Adobe for design now"" And I can only imagine the absolute mess in the IT dept when you let every user choose what program and file format they are going to edit in.

@String, it would not be a mess if you know what you are doing. But anything is a mess if you don't. I have worked in many places that had multiple different applications and it worked perfectly fine. In most cases, there are just a couple of good applications and it is easy for a professional to go between them if they need to. The Adobe mantra is that Adobe is the only one you need, but it really isn't. And it is not the best for many people either with the choice of software available.

@String. I am the person being referred to. There is no "absolute mess" in the IT department at all from not using Adobe exclusively. Just happy creatives who use software they like to do what they like doing.

As HayatoY pointed out, people who know what they are doing have no problem adjusting to new software and moving between them, or exporting in compatible formats.

Strange as it seems to those who use Adobe as a crutch, people can walk perfectly well without Adobe. And often better when using innovative new alternatives designed for modern templating and prototyping.

@ Vik2012 - I can only comment from my own 30+ years of IT experience; Every single company I've worked for has standards. Server OS, Database, Virtualization , Word Processing, email and yes even CAD and image editing tools. We currently have 47 "creatives" who (gasp) use Adobe products. If we allowed all users (6,000+) to use whatever application they wanted, then without a doubt it would be a complete and utter disaster.

Look I get it, you hate Adobe and thats fine, you are free to use whatever you want. However the hate on this site for anything Adobe and anyone who uses it is completely over the top.

@String. Take a little break from Adobe promotion for a minute. They don't care about you. Someone had to tell you. I hoped it wouldn't be me.

If you can't get some good alternatives to Adobe working in your business after 30+ years of IT experience, then don't take it out on the people on this forum.

Your argument is strange, as you have invented a counter argument where someone is apparently suggesting 6000+ people to "use whatever application they wanted". Sounds like nonsense to me, but I haven't seen anyone suggesting that.

I've been in much larger businesses than 6000 IT staff, where there was no lock-in with any one vender and it worked perfectly fine. Indeed, no lock-in is a key objective for a well managed and forward looking business.

Get help with handling a few different applications for design, if you can't manage it yourself. No harm in that.

"Indeed, no lock-in is a key objective for a well managed and forward looking business."

In a nutshell. Yes.

I think some of what you say is correct, but the land is shifting. Microsoft if asked and gives an honest reply is looking beyond the life of Windows. As someone that used the very first versions after tussling with early dos based TSR etc. I can say its been an interesting ride. However like Supercalc, Ami Pro , Quark Express, Norton Commander and many many great pieces of software the time is here for a new king. I am sure there are now as many folk that access the web and process with the likes of Android as there are Windows.
Here I make a quick note to CANON ..... please read the above comment !

@caplanner. You must be joking. Adobe software is no more reliable than any other.

Schools would be better off spending that money, which adds up to a considerable sum for students over time, on other things.

Popular open source projects produce products that are more open (obviously), standards based, stable and secure than closed source applications created in a in-house hive somewhere using proprietary systems.

For what it's worth, Adobe support has consistently been the worst I have experienced too.

Crazy is what you become when you stare at Adobe marketing fluff too long.

@jaques. Thanks.

You can make excuses all you want, but the bottom line is that they're getting way more money than ever out of the "average" user who did NOT need to upgrade every time a new version came out, but who did want to buy an old copy of Premiere and Lightroom and Photoshop just to have. Now, if you want more than just LR & PS, you're at $30/mo, not $10. I don't know about you, but I NEVER gave Adobe $1080 EVERY THREE YEARS, without exception.

@matthew saville
Im not sure what are you talking about. Full Adobe CC suite is nearly €900 which could work at your $1080 but that's based on ANNUAL payments not EVERY TREE YEARS. I presume you don't use CC so you don't know. That is quite lot of money isn't it?. In 10 years it is €9000 for software you are just renting...

@NetMage

Let me simplify this for you.
Adobe offers you 1 hotdog with mustard for $1. When you say you want another one but with ketchup they will charge you another $3 for it instead of $1. There is no difference if they sell you hotdog with mustard or ketchup, cost is the same.

@milkod2001,
That's why I mentioned the "average" user, and the rest of the caveat. It used to be a lot cheaper to just by 1-3 apps alone, and then almost never update 1-2 of the 2-3 apps, ever. Now, only one of the options is $9.99/mo, the rest, a la carte, are $19.99 each.

@matthew saville
Yes, indeed.

My problem with the subscription isn’t the cost (even though it does end up costing mores than equivalent annual $99 upgrades of Capture One Pro), it’s that the cost is ongoing if I want to maintain access to my working files. With Capture One, I can skip one, two, three generations and as long as I don’t buy a new camera and remain happy with the feature set, I’m able to save hundreds of dollars. With Adobe, I feel the need to convert my working files to TIFF for them to be genuinely mine rather than hostages of Adobe’s subscription scheme.

Hard to believe that 2018 there still exist people that are so naive that they think a corporation-scool relationship would be that simple. At least you cannot deny that this is a scheme to groom future paying customers by teaching children how to operate Adobe products as opposed to those by their competitors. In fact, I am surprised that the limitations to this deal are so harsh -- It would be in Adobe's interest that all the children in all the world's schools were groomed to use their products... That would bring in a lot of cash 10 years from now.

Case to the point -- I am using Adobe, even though I know there are much better alternatives. I just do not have the time to learn another system.

Some of us actually like to own the software we purchase. Maybe we are anachronistic for wanting so. I remember actually buying a piece of software that came in a box (admittedly a giant tree-slaughtering box) and I could install it and use it without having to be hassled to sign in. I would even fork over a higher cost readily. Oddly the only two I'm still hurting from still today are Audition for my recording and InDesign for papers and posters I co-author for my lab. Supporting the CC thing is about supporting a type of paradigm to me. I feel that someone of that belief will also be easily sold on the end of net neutrality.

Strictly speaking -- you do not own the software you purchase. You purchase the license to use it. The floppies/CDs/Download links are just a medium to install, not an actual physical object you have bought.

Once you stop paying Adobe, you can't open your own files - what does that sound like?

Hooked? Lol. Look at how many schools use chromebooks and Apple for computers, but no one complains about being hooked on either of those.

That might be because they own all their data and can still move to other systems, as opposed to Adobe products. So your comparison is moot.

""Once you stop paying Adobe, you can't open your own files - what does that sound like?"" And you get this from where? It doesn't matter how many times you say it, it doesn't make it true Mr. Trump.

@String. You cannot open Adobe (original with edit) files with all features (all layers, effects) once you stop paying Adobe. Playing with words doesn't change that. Look up the way Adobe CC subscription and file formats work.

"Once you stop paying Adobe, you can't open your own files"

NOT TRUE. NEVER BEEN TRUE.

Pushing an agenda based on a lie is the lowest of low. Adobe does NOT lock you out of your files once you stop paying. Stop making stuff up.

You just can't edit your files. They are still in the same folder on your storage device, accessible as its always been.

Gmon750 - Did I say the files vanish from your folder once you stop paying?
Adobe formats are not some completely open standards that you can open and edit in some other programs without any loss.
What do you do with the files that you can't edit and use as you like? Just look at them and be happy?!

@BaldCol. In the past that was not a problem, you had the Adobe application on your computer or disc with a license.

But with CC, you need an active subscription to use CC software (there may be a brief grace renewal period before termination).

You do not get to use your Adobe edited files containing non destructive edits without access to the CC software after your account dies (after you cut off the stream of money into it from your bank account).

Why, oh why do the Adobe stooges keep trying to fool people into thinking they will be OK to use CC software to regain full file features after they stop paying?!!

BaldCol and Gmon750 are playing word games for the Adobe marketing team it appears.

Yes, ADOBE DOES LOCK YOU OUT, as the software required to access and continue your edits STOPS WORKING on cancellation of your subscription.

The only options you have is to flatten down your files and lose your live layers/filters/edits prior to cancellation, or to use an alternative like Affinity that attempts to piece together as much of your Adobe file as it can with layers.

Be warned, if you are in doubt about paying future Adobe subscription prices and increases and you want to revisit old files to tweak saved edits in the source, stay away from Adobe CC.

@NotSoGreat. While some software may import PSD's, some features are unlikely to work. At least in recent versions, Smart Objects from PSD's wouldn't work in Affinity for example.

So, as DaveE1 stated. Best to avoid Adobe CC if you think you might not stick with it and the price increases, but need to open and edit older files.

@String, are you suggesting that a cell phone service is the same as buying software?

Do you know of any alternative cell phone services that offer perpetual licenses, as alternative software companies do? How would that work?

You didn't really think about your cell phone service vs software analogy before using it. There is no comparison.

""are you suggesting that a cell phone service is the same as buying software?"" No, I'm suggesting that any service is the same as subscribing to the CC model. Be it cell service, internet, Netflix, leasing a car, etc. etc. Its the world we live in now and like it or not, it isn't changing any time soon.

All I hear from Adobe haters is that there are so many other apps out there to use for free or otherwise yet they all are attracted like moths to a flame whenever DPR covers anything Adobe... give it a rest and go use whatever works for you.

Well @String. I still have some licenses for Adobe CC in my business. I am going to express my opinion on Adobe, their software and license model here.

I am sure others are also entitled to use the public forum to voice their opinions too.

Those who fervently worship at the Adobe alter will just have to say a few more prayers to their Adobe deity to compensate, I suppose.

"Those who fervently worship at the Adobe alter will just have to say a few more prayers to their Adobe deity to compensate, I suppose."

Is it not possible that I just prefer Adobe software to the others (and yes, I have tried them) and I'm happy paying to use it. I don't worship any god and I'm certainly not going to 'worship' a company.

All the BS about what you can and cannot do if you stop paying is pointless. There are plenty of sites you can look at which have the definitive answer, including Adobe's own.

BaldCol. I did check on Adobe's site, their forum and with their customer service.

To state it simply. If you stop paying, you are locked out of your working files as they are proprietary Adobe files that require an active subscription to access. You can save and copy your files, but not open and regain access to the edits saved in them like you can with software you have purchased a license for.

In other words Adobe allow you to rent access to your Adobe working files at whatever ongoing price they determine is good for them. Stop paying and you are locked out.

Other companies try to read the files and do a reasonable job, but some features in the Adobe files won't work. Adobe do not provide good documentation to allow others to implement full support according to developers.

So the BS about what you can and can't do if you stop paying is coming from the Adobe marketing people and their supporters in comment sections.

Beyond bored with this subject.

@BaldCol: Many people here are customers (or ex-customers) of Adobe and know what they are talking about. If your claim is - Adobe let's you open and edit the source files without paying the subscription fees, why don't you point us to one the many 'definitive answers' on Adobe forum you are talking about. Unless of course you are a troll or just too thick to comprehend plain English.

Gary, you get to keep an Apple computer when you get it for free. No ongoing subscription. Also, you don't need peripherals from Apple to use it.

You were apparently not around in the early days. These weren't given to the pupils but to the schools. I agree with you completely that subscription sucks

Here's a hint: Don't use it.

@Reilly Diefenbach. Trot along there, Adobe want your new monthly fee! Don't be late or you may upset them. Cheerleading for them here won't be an acceptable excuse.

Adobe is a commercial company that makes a product. If one feels there's value in that product, one uses (and pays) for it. If not, there's other options.

I don't derive income from my photography. Although I used the reasonably priced Adobe photo plan (~$10 monthly) that included PS and Lightroom for several years, I no longer subscribe.

I have a purchased copy of PS CS5, which does everything I need of PS, and I use C1 pro (for Sony) for my capture processing. I use the excellent (free) DaVinci Resolve for video editing.

Most of them don't need high-end features.
I have seen people using photoshop for cropping!

Getting hooked to Adobe's ransomware at a young age is a bad idea, even if Adobe gives it out for free.

And at the normal $10/month rate it would be $28800 over the last 12 years for the computers you do have.

You can definitely use this as an example for a personal finance class on why there is no such thing “as low monthly payments” when they go on for the rest of your life.

bladerunner6 : Exactly. Try explaining it to the Adobe fans.

It's not necessary to explain ten bucks a month to me and millions of other subscribers. I'm happy to pay that little for the world's best photographic software. Whatever it is you're using doesn't even come close. We're happy. Get it?

I really don't begrudge anyone who pays for CC individually, but for schools of our size (where we have maybe 20 kids a year who use Adobe software) the subscription model just doesn't work.

@ winkalman - and what do you pay for MS licensing? How about VMWare licensing? Citrix? Oracle?

Students don't need the latest version to learn editing skills, they need a good teacher. Using an older version is more of a challenge, which is exactly what students need: challenges. Waht Adobe wants is obviously students who depend on Adobe's tricks and features, so that they won't learn how todo things manually and will be dependent on Adobe software once they start working.

Well then zakk9 I guess they should all be learning on old 286 DOS machines and not using all the "tricks" that MS introduced with Windows. May as well also teach them on film cameras and get away from "tricks" with digital?

I was teaching photo editing on 286 and 386 computers running Windows 3.11 around 1995 at a school that couldn't afford Photoshop, so we used an alternative photo editing software that worked fine for our needs. If I were to teach photo editing today, much of of what I would teach would be the same as back then. The principles of editing are still the same. The technical side of Photoshop is the easy part. Any nitwit can figure those out by reading the manual or watching some Youtube video.

Schools exist to teach students how to use their brains, not to repeat what Adobe has thought out for them.

"...and what do you pay for MS licensing? How about VMWare licensing? Citrix? Oracle?"

We spent about $8K for 200 MS Office 2007 licenses, but that was back when we had 4 computer labs. We'll be down to one lab this summer, plus a chromebook cart, and the BYOD iPads that students are required to purchase. Windows licenses are rolled into the cost of the PC and the handful of Windows server licenses we have are a trivial amount (about $200 per). We run the free version of VMWare and we have no need for Citrix or Oracle. I really don't mind paying for software licenses but Adobe currently just doesn't offer anything that works for our size and use case.

"I'd have issues with putting (and paying for) my kid in a private school and being expected to use a 12-year old version of Photoshop"

"You are teaching kids old worthless software versions now? That's not ideal."

Next you'll be telling me you can't learn photography on a 12 year old camera. Anyone who has mastered the concepts on one photo editing program ought to be able to get up to speed on another relatively quickly. We're talking about kids cropping or adjusting exposure on photos for their yearbook. They just don't need content aware fill, smart objects, or automated HDR. In a production environment automated features add value, in education they're often just a crutch.

Every student needs to crop photo! ;)

I have moved to Affinity Photo and Designer - it took me few months but it's much better than the hideously bloated Photoshop and Illustrator. I just hope it manages to resist the nasty ransomware monster called Adobe.

I've tried Affinity's products and while they've evolved quickly, they've still got a long way to go to measure up to Adobe's.

In many ways, Affinity products are now better for most people. Their workflow and responsive live effects are better thought out. For those addicted to Photoshop or Illustrator, there are even many conventional shortcuts in Affinity products that make the switch easier.

Maybe not now. But let's say if another competitor did offer their product free to students and teachers (Say PhaseOne C1, although not very likely either) then Adobe might change their mind. I mean, yeah, $5 per seat (which is what I'm assuming it is) adds up.

A lot of companies (Solidworks, MIcrosoft, etc) are seeing the value in offering their products either very very cheaply (which this qualifies) or free to students, to somewhat pay off I guess in the end. They learn how to use the software so when they leave school and go into the industry, they are more inclined to use such products and pay the regular retail prices.

@sirhawkeye64. Yes, good point.

I worked in Higher Education IT for over 15 years. In my time Microsoft only licensed their products at no cost to universities for very specfic conditions usually having to do with programs teaching software development. It was very much the exception rather than the rule.

On a related note, the idea of licensing software for annual usage rights instead of outright purchases was commonplace with some MS academic licensing programs long before Adobe ever introduced Creative Cloud.

My understanding are that students get a discounted, student price for Microsoft Office. They don't get it for "free". Has this changed recently?

Have you seen their Visual STudio Community edition for developers? It's free. It's all to get people to use their products. This software use to cost a few hundred bucks to get the most basic developer tools. Now they are free (they are basically the next iteration of their "Express" editions they had back in 2010-2013).

And actually MS has changed their licensing on Windows a bit (or activation for that matter). It used to be that Windows would stop working or nag you constantly about activating. Now they just disable features and put a watermark on the desktop..

Windows 7 Starter did not require expensive hardware. Also keep in mind that Linux is community-based, Windows is not.

Microsoft has come around on what their products were costing people. Windows upgrades used to cost $300+. Now you can get them for $200 or less. Cost of ownership/use for a closed-source software will always be more than open source software (like LInux).

My sister is in college and she pays a student price for Office 365. I don't ever recall it being "free" for students, unless under certain, limited circumstances.

I know when one buys a laptop, Office 365 comes for "free" for one year, but after that it's regular pricing.

@Gmon750 - No one is forcing...., except the requirement to finish their class assignments on the computers and software provided. Strictly speaking, you are correct; they could refuse to complete the assignments, and fail the course.

How do you feel about most teachers wanting you to use Microsoft Word?

@talings - Sounds like you should be blaming the school administration and not Adobe right?

The thing is, had Adobe decided not to do anything, people will come out of the woodwork and complain that Adobe is gouging students by not offering a discounted price for students. Hence, Adobe is greedy.

On the flip side, Adobe DOES offer a discounted student price, and people come out of the woodwork and complain that Adobe is offering a gateway drug to get them hooked on their software so later, they pay full price. Hence, Adobe is greedy.

So then... exactly what should Adobe do to shut up the haters?

"Gmon750
Ignorant. No one is forcing them to use it."

Yeah, look at the mirror and you see who is the ignorant... You are not using them, but they are forced to use it.

All their classes will be with it. Their teachers are going through classes to use it. Their teacher books will be based to Adobe products.

Everything is done with Adobe products blindly, without thinking, without choice to use anything else because you can't follow the guides, books, lessons etc.

IF you want to use other tools, then you need to know the other tools how to do all, meaning what the heck are you doing in the school when you already know all the things?

This is for up to K-12 students, this is where they learn to use these tools and most will never use any other because they are familiar to the ones they used at school and at home.

So maybe you should first learn what is difference "full price" and "special discount" when it comes to education, as it ain't anything like you claim it to be.

Again... Take this with the school administration, not Adobe. How is it Adobe's fault?

Many schools often require students to submit their reports in Microsoft Word. No one barks about that?

Like it or not, standardizing one one package whether it be Adobe or Microsoft provides consistency and standardization for everyone. In Adobe's case, a school is not going to accept projects done in GIMP, or Pixlemator, or whatever else and be expected to support students in whatever obscure non-school-approved software they're using. It makes sense and allows teachers to focus on the work at hand, and not deal with the multiple different packages being used.

Schools charge a king's ransom for books and materials alone per semester. $5 for an entire year of modern graphic software is chump change. That's $20 total for four years of college! Students will pay more for coffee per week.

In the end, everyone wins. This is simply an anti-Adobe agenda, nothing more.

@tailings: No fish is forced to bite the hook either.
While no one can blame Adobe for doing this (smart move), the blast radius will be significant, considering the high entry bar (number of licenses). Obviously once bitten the bait, students will be forced to use it.
Still, I don't see this as a good target for protests...

Three mixed metaphors in two sentences back to back? That must be some kind of record, even in here.

"cloud storage solution" is the marketing term for a "network drive" on Windows, while on Unix it doesn't even matter where the storage is as it is just a file (in this case a special file called "directory") just like any other hardware is just a file (printers, scanners, webcams, keyboards, mouses etc are just files in Unix system where you I/O things through them and drivers does the work).

So the "cloud" in the name are just marketing for ignorant high level officials who doesn't want to know how the tech works.
For the user it doesn't matter is the files stored over network or locally when it is just in username/files/images directory, until they are off-line and can't find anything....

I'm not sure what the alternative is to the "pusher" model, as you call it. Offer it for super cheap to everyone? Charge full price to students?