This discussions seems to have coalesced around two camps: whether or not tablets are useful for post-processing. It might be helpful to take a step back from that discussion, primarily because tablets are still in their infancy compared to the power of a laptop. If you go back a few years (maybe even a decade), the same arguments were being made against laptops. I'll bet there are still many desktop users who still question the use of a laptop for post-processing.
We are dealing with a change in technology. Early adopters see the benefits. Late adopters see the costs. We are clearly moving towards a tablet world. It makes clear sense for Adobe to be putting out an app like LRm even if it's not yet perfect and even if tablets are not yet perfect. If you wait for perfection you will die before it happens.
Is there anyone else out there who feels that the bigger issue is the way Adobe has done this: forcing LR standalone users to pay $99/year if they wish to use LRm. I know it's optional, you get cloud space as well as PS, and LR is (still) standalone (for now) if you don't want the service, but let's look at the big picture: is anyone concerned about the long-term issue of tying yourself to making rentals payments to a company to interact with (tag, edit, present) your images forever? Forever is a long time. What you're signing up for is a lifetime of payments. For how many more years do you expect to be actively involved in photography?
Or have the members of this forum just accepted this as the new reality and have moved on? I know it makes sense for professionals who can write off the expense, but what about those millions of photographers who dabble (or more – even have shows), but can't write off the expense. $100/year really adds up over time.
Of course, maybe my argument is moot. After all, in looking at my own future, I expect (hope) to be actively involved in photography for at least 25 more years. If things stay relatively the same (given inflation, I know they won't, but bear with me), that would be $100/year for 25 years - less than the cost of a professional camera body spread over 25 years. Heck, back in the film days, I would spend many times that on film for one extended shoot. AND, turning more of my photos into prints and books would allow them to be "perpetual" beyond the life of Adobe CC. Maybe my thinking out loud has just solved my dilemma. Thanks for listening!
(Edit: Auto-correct corrections made.)
