Lightroom 6 - Dead end ?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

You don't subscribe to anything?

If I can avoid it, which is not always possible.

Which is why the concern for a subscription only Lightroom version has merit, if one uses a healthy view on contingency planning.

I try to not bet on a single horse, especially when the signs for its future are clouded by greedy tendencies. The current difficulties and needless hurdles that are deliberately created to prevent getting a non-cloud version is a sign on the wall, IMHO.

Cheers,
Bart

[Chris Kern]

The subscription-based trend (and the attempts to make people buy into it rather than their traditional license model) seems to be fairly recent though.

Not for enterprise customers, who have long been accustomed to purchasing "software as a service" and/or paying annual fees for "software maintenance" (i.e., patches and configuration assistance) for server-side applications.  What I think is fairly recent is the migration of this business model to the desktop.  That doesn't mean it is unwelcome among volume purchasers.  When I was managing an IT organization, one of my biggest headaches was trying to budget for sporadic upgrades of desktop software for about 2500 Windows seats.  I only had a small number of Adobe creative suite licenses to deal with, but if my organization had been more graphics-intensive I suspect I would have been delighted by Adobe's introduction of the "Creative Cloud" (albeit irritated by the rather meaningless and somewhat misleading brand name), as long as the cost/seat was approximately the same as what I was accustomed to spending on an annualized basis.

Adobe is hardly alone in doing this.  Microsoft is moving aggressively in the same direction with its Office suite and, from what I hear, is doing very well with it.  The model may not always be attractive to purchasers who only need one or two licenses—and who only need to answer to themselves rather than respond to the clamor of end-users for upgrades—but I suspect I suspect it has gone over quite well in the enterprise market.

Actually, my take on the persistence of the standalone (perpetual) Lightroom license and the inexpensive CC photography bundle is that Adobe is giving favored treatment to photographers over other low-volume customers.

[Rhossydd]

Not for enterprise customers, who have long been accustomed to purchasing "software as a service" and/or paying annual fees for "software maintenance" (i.e., patches and configuration assistance) for server-side applications. 

Which makes perfect sense for a business. It's also to see how this model was arrived at from teh days when all software was bespoke and written, or substantially adapted, to suit the client.
For hobbyists, or even single person businesses who wish to continue working into what others might consider retirement, without business income, subscription makes a lot less sense.

[Phil Indeblanc]

Once it goes cloud I will already have an alternate to replace it. I think the more people give into renting software makes it more possible. For the sake of convenience we give up something you have control over to something you will simply borrow, for a long time. It also ends up costing more, as most users were upgrading biyearly...but all this has already been mentioned somewhere. Just thought I'd jump in and have my say as a NON supporter of rental software.

[hjulenissen]

You don't subscribe to anything?
I'd find that rather difficult.

I subscribe to a car, because the deal was good. However, my car can be replaced by another car (be it subscription or self-ownership) without me having to learn how to drive all-over again, or having revoked the memories of all hollidays spent in that car.

-h

[john beardsworth]

without ... having revoked the memories of all hollidays spent in that car.

You can continue to use LR after you stop renting. You can do everything except go into Develop or Map.

[digitaldog]

You can continue to use LR after you stop renting. You can do everything except go into Develop or Map.

Which is kind of neat, you don't throw the baby out with the bath water, you still have a nice DAM. And that great Print Module.
Do you know Command E (Edit in Photoshop) in Library would still work? You could bounce back to ACR instead of Develop.

[Chris Kern]

Do you know Command E (Edit in Photoshop) in Library would still work? You could bounce back to ACR instead of Develop.

Or to DxO, Iridient, etc., I presume, since the "Edit In" dialog is available from the Library module.

[john beardsworth]

Do you know Command E (Edit in Photoshop) in Library would still work? You could bounce back to ACR instead of Develop.

Assuming you still own PS, of course. But you can still adjust images in LR after ending a subscription - Quick Develop and presets will work.

[chez]

Assuming you still own PS, of course. But you can still adjust images in LR after ending a subscription - Quick Develop and presets will work.

So the world doesn't stop turning the day you stop your subscription, contrary to what a lot of doom and gloom forecasters are claiming.

For the recorded, I subscribed to LR / PS for about 1.5 years and so far am very happy.

[indusphoto]

You can continue to use LR after you stop renting. You can do everything except go into Develop or Map.

If you have to delete the program (new hard disk, new computer, etc..) can you reinstall the program?

[Paul Wright]

I did the LR CC update this week on my two Win 8.1 PC's. Completely smooth, no hitches update from LR 5.7. The new features are welcome, the speed boost is immediately tangible as is the responsiveness of the sliders in Develop module. I'm happy with the full CC suite model, updates come in pretty often and the CC Suite is massive in it's scope. If you shoot both still and video and use PremierePro, the CC Suite is brilliant. For stills-only shooters, the CC LR/PS bundle is really great value.

Face it, the subscription model is here to stay and we're already seeing software companies from Adobe to Microsoft, accounting and so on quickly ramping up their subscription-based futures. So rather than grumble about vanishing perpetual licence models, we should just knuckle down and do what we do best...shooting great images.

-pw

[indusphoto]

Face it, the subscription model is here to stay and we're already seeing software companies from Adobe to Microsoft, accounting and so on quickly ramping up their subscription-based futures. So rather than grumble about vanishing perpetual licence models, we should just knuckle down and do what we do best...shooting great images.

-pw

I do have Office 365 subscription for my work. For $15/month I get email with Microsoft exchange, 1TB of online storage (per user), Microsoft Sharepoint, Online conferencing, and Office suite. Of these, I was paying $7/user for exchange email before, and $30/month/user for online conferencing. I did not have Dropbox but if I did, it would be also 20-30/month. So Microsoft pricing is a steal. I am paying less than I was before, except that all my money is now going to Microsoft. I am ecstatic at the deal.

If I drop my subscription tomorrow, I just need to forward my email to somewhere else, and download all files to my hard drive (they are actually already there). My Office 2003 can still open and edit all my files and Office 2013 can be had for $150/seat.

What Adobe is trying to do is charge more money for the same product/service. What am I going to do with a paltry 25Gb of storage online and I can barely keep my Lightroom running smoothly on my PC, how would I manage this on iPhone and iPad?

[Schewe]

If you have to delete the program (new hard disk, new computer, etc..) can you reinstall the program?

Uh, yeah...obviously. Do you really think the sky is falling chicken little?

Some people really need to take the tin foil off their heads...not everybody is out to get you!

Point of fact LR6 has changed in that it allows you access to your images even if your subscription ends...you can't use Develop or Maps but you can still see & export your images (even if you can't change settings in Develop). BTW, you can still use Quick Develop in Library.

So, it's not like Adobe is locking you out of your images...

[indusphoto]

Uh, yeah...obviously. Do you really think the sky is falling chicken little?

Some people really need to take the tin foil off their heads...not everybody is out to get you!

No, not everyone. Just Adobe.

[Rhossydd]

Uh, yeah...obviously. Do you really think the sky is falling chicken little?

It's all too new for you to make such sweeping statements. Let's see how easy it will be for someone who, say, drops their subscription at LR6, then needs to re-install six years later. Will there still be a version of LR6 to freely download, install and use for ex-subscribers ? You really can't say.

[Schewe]

It's all too new for you to make such sweeping statements. Let's see how easy it will be for someone who, say, drops their subscription at LR6, then needs to re-install six years later. Will there still be a version of LR6 to freely download, install and use for ex-subscribers ? You really can't say.

Really? Six years later? Really?

Ya gotta be kidding...I think you answered your own question...that's unreasonable-a totally unreasonable expectation.

Although Adobe did allow users of Photoshop CS and CS2 to download and install a non-activated version of CS2 because Adobe had to shut down the CS Activation servers (for security reasons). So, I guess Adobe has shown totally unfriendly user behavior huh?

BTW, how do you wear your tin foil? As a cap or hat?

[Manoli]

Although Adobe did allow users of Photoshop CS and CS2 to download and install a non-activated version of CS2 because Adobe had to shut down the CS Activation servers (for security reasons) ...

And what exactly were those 'security reasons' ?

Or was it rather that a bunch of radio station guys broke the authentication code and there were programs (apps) floating around the net that enabled anybody to authenticate a freely downloadable trial version of CS2 - leaving Adobe with little alternative ?

BTW, how do you spell 'spin' ?

[rdonson]

It's all too new for you to make such sweeping statements. Let's see how easy it will be for someone who, say, drops their subscription at LR6, then needs to re-install six years later. Will there still be a version of LR6 to freely download, install and use for ex-subscribers ? You really can't say.

Geez, six years is a VERY long time with computers.  I can't recall a 6 year period without an operating system update even for Windoze.  Even MS is catching on that supporting ancient APIs just so you can run ancient software is a very poor security practice. 

[Rhossydd]

Geez, six years is a VERY long time with computers. 

Not as much as it used to be. As software matures people upgrade less and that's a trend that will continue.

I use Word/Excel (2002), Photoshop/Bridge/InDesign CS4(2008), PMP5(2003), Gamutvision(2004), Homesite 4 (2000) on Windows 7 (2009) and still can't see any reason to upgrade any of them.
I still keep a Windows XP(2001) laptop to get my Epson 3800(2006) printer to print long panoramas that can't be printed on more modern systems or printers, plus I can still use my GMB Spectroscan T (2005) on it.

You don't have to fall for 'it's newer, it must be better', you can still use perfectly capable older software and save a small fortune. For those on limited budgets that's important.