If you do the math, $20 a month x18 ($360) for a 1 year 'All Apps' Cloud Subscription (18 months was the rotation time between new versions in the 'sofware you own' days) is less expensive than what the packaged software used to cost. But then we are locked on 'forever' or we lose access and that is not so good...
sounds great. Where did you get a $20 for all apps offer? best offer I've seen is one year introductory offer at 29.95/mth, which then goes to standard 49.95/mth. I've been on this for a year and now am at the 49.95 price. So the math is $30x18=$540, followed by $50x18 = $900. The $20 is for one app.
For anyone using multiple programs this model is terrific. For those using only one or two, maybe not so good.
I usually skipped one or two, often more because there were not enough new features to justify the cost.
I think this pushed Adobe to the subscription model. Adobe spends some development money to maintain some older versions (they just updated CS6) for a while through hardware and OS upgrades , printer driver changes etc, and I think to some degree forces the development budget to focus on gee whiz features to help sell an upgrade, perhaps at the expense of really useful things that aren't as flashy. Eventually hardware and OS changes will break CS3, 4, 5 and at some point in the future 6, at that point they will be focused on a single version. Of course the other problem is quite obvious, they had trouble monetizing major upgrades because the adoption rate was unreliable(a big problem for all software companies )
I might not mind the concept of a subscription IF there was a way out in the future, but in CC's case there isn't... and Adobe knows it.
I think the CC model is pretty logical. They seemed to do what most big companies do and fail to implement it well, in this case I don't think they considered the huge disparity of the user base in how many apps they actually use ... the all inclusive model really isn't appealing to some users (although it certainly is appealing to many). But if you want to get off the bus (a term I saw in one of the many other threads on this) it isn't any different at all than deciding to not use Photoshop or Lightroom with the perpetual license model. Everyone argues this point but it doesn't apply at all. As long as you want to use Layered PSD's and tiffs with Adobe proprietary technology, you keep buying photoshop whether it is a perpetual or subscription model. Opting out results in the same thing, you need to save flattened tiffs that are non proprietary. This seems to be everyones biggest complaint, yet it really isn't a CC issue. Nothing changes with the subscription model ... just like a perpetual license you pay as long as you want to use it (eventually you will have to upgrade because eventually it will break) and when you no longer want to use it, you have to flatten your files and move to something else. The only difference is opting out of a perpetual model means it may be some time before things break to the point you can't use them, where as opting out of CC means it breaks the next month. But you would need to plan for either case, and the path out is the same.
As far as non competition argument, I'm not sure how that's Adobe's fault. Seems they are just doing what they do, and managed to create some really great apps that are widely used. The challenge for any new company is to really create something compelling enough to switch. Microsoft Office has lost some market share because it became too overwhelming and others have created useful tools that are simpler and do enough for what people want, but the power users stay with Word and Excel. Same thing here ... there are many other options that are simpler and easier to use, but most on this forum are really in the power user category, a smaller market and not very appealing to many developing new software.
