Adobe Max

[john beardsworth]

I was going to post to point people to the keynote at Adobe Max https://max.adobe.com/ which you can watch online at 9amPDT or 5pm London time.

But this has just gone on Adobe's site.
http://news.adobe.com/press-release/creative-cloud/adobe-introduces-new-lightroom-cc-cloud-photography-service

Might be even more reason to watch Max?

[john beardsworth]

And this from Tom Hogarty http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshop/2017/10/introducing-lightroom-cc-lightroom-classic-cc-and-more.html

[CeeVee]

What is Adobe Spark?
And why?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[davidgp]

Only subscription licence model now... it will be interesting to read the forum the following days

[john beardsworth]

What is Adobe Spark?
And why?

It's quite a good online app (utility) to create a story-style web page without knowing anything about HTML, FTP, responsive design etc. You might use it to share photos after an event or vacation, including text and pictures.

Adobe produce a lot of "lab experiments", but this one is quite good.

[davidgp]

What is Adobe Spark?
And why?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

They have it since a year ago or so... it is an easy way to build a webpage for people that does not have idea of design or wants to hire a designer + web administrator to host the page: https://spark.adobe.com/features

[CeeVee]

I hate "cutsie" named. Rather see a discriptive.


Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[digitaldog]

And this from Tom Hogarty http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshop/2017/10/introducing-lightroom-cc-lightroom-classic-cc-and-more.html

Same fellow and same blog where he wrote:


Q. Will Lightroom become a subscription only offering after Lightroom 5?
A. Future versions of Lightroom will be made available via traditional perpetual licenses indefinitely.

Didn't he say it would be perpetual as long as he was the product manager too?

[john beardsworth]

"Indefinitely" doesn't mean for ever, does it? I'm not sure one accuse anyone of having been hypocritical when at the time you fully understood they were using a form of words designed to give them wiggle room?

[digitaldog]

"Indefinitely" doesn't mean for ever, does it? I'm not sure one accuse anyone of having been hypocritical when at the time you fully understood they were using a form of words designed to give them wiggle room?

in·def·i·nite·ly
ˌinˈdef(ə)nətlē/Submit
adverb
for an unlimited or unspecified period of time.
"talks cannot go on indefinitely"
to an unlimited or unspecified degree or extent.
"an indefinitely large number of channels"

[john beardsworth]

Indefinite or unlimited or unspecified. In each case the first element means "not". Not defined, specified etc.

Even if you choose to think the word means "for ever", people didn't really believe him at the time anyway. We all understand these are forms of words.

[digitaldog]

Indefinite or unlimited or unspecified. In each case the first element means "not". Not defined, specified etc.
Even if you choose to think the word means "for ever", people didn't really believe him at the time anyway.
We all understand these are forms of words.

I usually believe people until I catch them in a lie! As I did from Tom.
We all is your text where you're speaking for everyone which I suggest isn't a good idea sir. 

[john beardsworth]

Nowadays's no-one's so naive - speaking for everyone again - that they believe at face value promises made by businesses or politicians.

[digitaldog]

Nowadays's no-one's so naive - speaking for everyone again - that they believe at face value promises made by businesses or politicians.

Anyone who believes Tom's lies is the naive reader. Speaking for everyone besides yourself looks rather foolish too but continue if you must. 

[pegelli]

Nowadays's no-one's so naive - speaking for everyone again - that they believe at face value promises made by businesses or politicians.

Even more reason to be very cautious to buy into a subscription program, despite all the "goodies" that are promised there.

[digitaldog]

Even more reason to be very cautious to buy into a subscription program, despite all the "goodies" that are promised there.

A promise doesn't mean for ever, does it?

[David Mantripp]

Is a middle manger really able to make promises for a corporation ?   CEO calls, says "no more standalone Lr" - what does Tom say ? "but sir, I PWOMISED!!", or "how high should I jump, sir?" ...

It is blindingly obvious that it makes zero strategic or financial sense to keep selling standalone Lr.  The fact that it makes moral sense is totally irrelevant.

[digitaldog]

Is a middle manger really able to make promises for a corporation ?   

No! He shouldn't have in the first place, that's kind of my point. I've got no beef with the corporation or it's decision to go fully subscription.

[john beardsworth]

Anyone who believes Tom's lies is the naive reader. Speaking for everyone besides yourself looks rather foolish too but continue if you must.

It only looks foolish to you.... I'm sure everyone agrees that responding to you is what is truly foolish. Bye.

[kers]

It is only a logical from Adobes viewpoint to change everything to CC.
 More unity...( less work) more profit...

And all the people that have invested in the LR-DAM system simply will have to follow as soon as their new camera is unsupported.
or is it possible to migrate the DAM system to another dam system?
Next stage will be a steady increase of cost renting the software.
(Remember it was free of cost in the beginning when they had to cope with by Aperture that was the first of its kind)