Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: Wayne Fox on September 04, 2013, 01:25:37 pm
-
Sitting in keynote at photoshop world and adobe just announced new permanent price is 9.95/mth.for all who own cs3 or greater to use ps cc and LR. Includes behance and storage as well
-
More info here:
http://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/
Quick note, this is available for people who sign up by December 31st. The price is the base price, i.e. that is your price as long as you maintain the membership.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
More info here:
http://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/
Quick note, this is available for people who sign up by December 31st. The price is the base price, i.e. that is your price as long as you maintain the membership.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
I subscribed on July 30 or 31 to a one-application subscription of Photoshop for the $9.99 price for a year, and then $19.99 after that. I wonder if Adobe would let me switch to the LR+PS special?
-
I subscribed on July 30 or 31 to a one-application subscription of Photoshop for the $9.99 price for a year, and then $19.99 after that. I wonder if Adobe would let me switch to the LR+PS special?
walter.sk, as long as you own a previous version of Photoshop or Photoshop Extended, version CS3 or later (CS3 thru CS6), then you will be automatically transitioned to the newly introduced program, which has the lower ongoing price (9.99/mo).
Some more info in the FAQ here:
http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/faq.html#pslr-bundle
-
Does this mean they have now snuck Lightroom into the CC rental model without the option to have permanent serial numbers for future upgrade versions of LR?
-
Does this mean they have now snuck Lightroom into the CC rental model without the option to have permanent serial numbers for future upgrade versions of LR?
I don't think so, Lr has been available for the whole package subscription for some time ... though not as a single app subscription ...
-
Correct, Lr is still on the perpetual (not subscription) license model, and (AFAIK) there are no plans to change that.
-
Does this mean they have now snuck Lightroom into the CC rental model without the option to have permanent serial numbers for future upgrade versions of LR?
No, it's just another option for those that wish to use LR and Photoshop CC.
-
walter.sk, as long as you own a previous version of Photoshop or Photoshop Extended, version CS3 or later (CS3 thru CS6), then you will be automatically transitioned to the newly introduced program, which has the lower ongoing price (9.99/mo).
Some more info in the FAQ here:
http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/faq.html#pslr-bundle
Just a quick clarification, if you took advantage of the $9.99 offer for PS CC, then you will automatically be transitioned to the new offer (i.e. you will get Lightroom). If you have a regular, $19.99 subscription to PS CC, you will need to contact customer support to transition to the new offer.
We are updating the FAQ to make this clearer.
Sorry for the confusion....
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
Thanks guys for the clarification.
-
Correct, Lr is still on the perpetual (not subscription) license model, and (AFAIK) there are no plans to change that.
That is correct. You can still get a perpetual license of Lightroom, and we don't plan to change that.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
Mike, welcome, and nice to see someone from Adobe posting here. Hopefully it will reduce the level of FUD. ;)
-
Mike, welcome, and nice to see someone from Adobe posting here. Hopefully it will reduce the level of FUD. ;)
Thanks. Ive been a long time lurker (Im an amateur photographer), and have learned a ton from the site. I figured I would finally get around to creating an account, and try to help out.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
Mike, welcome, and nice to see someone from Adobe posting here. Hopefully it will reduce the level of FUD. ;)
Edit: Not to slight Eric Chan's valuable contributions on the technical side.... :o
-
Thanks, Eric.
-
Edit: Not to slight Eric Chan's valuable contributions on the technical side.... :o
No worries, AFairley. ;D
-
I notice the offer is for "Lightroom 5"... as in version 5 of Lightroom only, not any future version of Lightroom. So, when Lightroom 5 is outdated in 2-3 years by Lightroom versions 6/7/etc, that portion of this offer beomes useless, and it turns into paying $9.99/month/forever for Photoshop CC.
-
I notice the offer is for "Lightroom 5"... as in version 5 of Lightroom only, not any future version of Lightroom. So, when Lightroom 5 is outdated in 2-3 years by Lightroom versions 6/7/etc, that portion of this offer beomes useless, and it turns into paying $9.99/month/forever for Photoshop CC.
I see some logic to the assumption, but LR 5 happens to be the name of the shipping version of LR as opposed to CC for PHotoshop now. But CC members get access to the current version of LR regardless of the version number, so it can easily be assumed that is the new model, and not some premeditated or insidious plot on their part.
I think Adobe has just done some serious listening and analyzing and realize how advantageous it is to get those in the photography community who use LR/PS all on the same version and off all the old versions which are struggling under newer operating systems. Then they can leverage the new beHanced and cloud features to much larger pool of photographers. Sort of a "if I cut the price in half, I may get 4 times the subscribers." approach Same cash flow, but much more power and guessing they may get far more than a 4x uptick in subscribers. Certainly I don't have the inside info, but now that they have a year of CC experience perhaps they just decided the model needs tweaked, and one of the most powerful advantages of CC is best realized by growing the numbers.
-
Sitting in keynote at photoshop world and adobe just announced new permanent price is 9.95/mth for all who own cs3 or greater to use ps cc and LR. Includes behance and storage as well
If you don't own a recent copy of CS then this new offer does not apply to you.
Or in other words, if you've already spent a lot of money on Adobe products then they'll let you get on the rental supply chain for less than if you haven't.
-
I have PSCS6 as part of the Creative Suite 6 Design & Web Premium. Does this mean that I cannot get the $9.99/mo price on Photoshop CC?
-
Well duh. Never mind. I have an old copy of PSCS3 in the box with the S/N still on it. That should do it.
-
If you don't own a recent copy of CS then this new offer does not apply to you.
If you own CS3 or newer you get it. CS3 was released in April of 2007 ... not very recent. This pretty much covers the vast majority of their photographer user base - I don't think there are many users of CS2 or older around.
Or in other words, if you've already spent a lot of money on Adobe products then they'll let you get on the rental supply chain for less than if you haven't.
mmm, so if I've been a user of Adobe products and have invested money in Photoshop, i get a better deal?
Pretty much standard policy for many successful companies ... nothing unique. Whats wrong with rewarding a good user? I have no problem with this, and in fact think it is quite fair and logical.
-
I have PSCS6 as part of the Creative Suite 6 Design & Web Premium. Does this mean that I cannot get the $9.99/mo price on Photoshop CC?
Why would that happen? You own CS6, no?
-
Peter, Terry White's blog says that suites do not qualify for the $9.99/mo deal.
http://terrywhite.com/adobe-creative-cloud-bundle-photographers-announced-photoshop-world/
-
Peter, Terry White's blog says that suites do not qualify for the $9.99/mo deal.
Makes sense, they'd rather have all of your money, not just some of it.
Cheers,
Bart
-
The Cost of being Obstinate:
So far I fail to see the benefit of Subscriptions. Adobe's senior management has alienated a significant portion of their user base, mobilizing them into opposition, lost a significant portion of the support community (like book writers and publishers) with the CC product and had to provide lower earnings guidance to the investment community through the next two years as well as paint a big target on their back. The only short term positive return has been the performance of their stock. Given time I predict that it will trade lower. Had Adobe been a retail company, the investment community would not have treated lightly, Adobe's squandering of its customer's goodwill.
Adobe knew they were going to have a problem with their user base and preceded their subscription announcement with lower projected earnings, but I think they under estimated the lack of gullible people who would sign up for their subscription service. I rather doubt the "good will pronouncements" that they have listened to the Photographers, but rather this is motivated by their need of another vehicle to build up their subscription numbers before the next quarterly earnings release. As it is, this latest twist from Adobe raises as many questions as it satisfies.
There has been a rather complex discussion of the relationship between LR standalone, LRCC, PS6 and PSCC. Had Adobe made this offering at the time they made the subscription only announcement, I would imagine there would have been less of an angry outcry, as it is, people like me refused to subscribe to CC in total, purchased LR and reluctantly signed up for the temporary $9.99 PSCC option to bide time. Now, as I understand it, I will be automatically rolled into the new offering which will include the purchased LR (assume this is LRCC which is supposed to have PSCC options) that I have already made. Now comes the problems.
The Adobe FAQ page on this offering says that the $9.99 rate will be permanent. There will be NO price changes for this offering. I find this hard to believe but I suppose at $120 a year, for PS and LR is less than I was paying now, but then I was a Creative Suit member which I will no longer pay for. But here are some of the real issues. What is now Adobe's commitment to maintaining PS6? What happens to my LR license in the future when I receive my upgrades and new releases from CC? Will I have to maintain both? Let's say, a year from now, Adobe releases a new version of LR (will there be new version releases of LR?), will I have to pay for a new license as well as receive in through CC? I know this ruffles the ears of some of the contributors here, but I no longer trust the senior management of Adobe.
Another question, after being direct to the FAQ page on "Photoshop Photography Program" I also read the FAQ's listed there on other Adobe Programs. One word that repeatedly jumped out at me was the use of the word "purchase." i.e., "Work with your Adobe account executive regarding purchase options for Creative Cloud for enterprise. Request a consultation now" and "Available in July, government customers will be able to purchase the Creative Cloud Desktop Applications subscription via Adobe’s CLP-G licensing program. " How is this term used here? What are they purchasing?
Finally, in various posts and comments, there is the repeated reference that the subscription program "is here to stay and that there is no turning back". Let me echo the observations of several users here that "nothing in the future is certain." If senior management is not able to garner the revenues and subscription rates they promised the Board of Directors, the Board will replace them with new management.
Yesterday, an analyst for the automotive industry made an interesting observation regarding the turn around of the US automotive industry. The old management of 5 years ago made cars to make money. They were replaced by senior management who believe in making cars based on what customers wanted. Right now Adobe's management is focused on making money and now on what their users want. As such it will be a long tough road downhill and it is better for us to find a new vehicle to ride in.
Earl Robicheaux
-
I subscribed on July 30 or 31 to a one-application subscription of Photoshop for the $9.99 price for a year, and then $19.99 after that. I wonder if Adobe would let me switch to the LR+PS special?
Im in the same boat, I had the same question. I asked a sales rep at Adobe this morning. Answer was yes. Promotion doesn't start till' 17th this month though.
-
Im in the same boat, I had the same question. I asked a sales rep at Adobe this morning. Answer was yes. Promotion doesn't start till' 17th this month though.
If you subscribed to the $9.99 PS CC offer, you will automatically be upgraded to the Photography offer, which includes Lightroom and Photoshop.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
I understood the original furor when Adobe originally announced the adoption of a subscription based program for Photoshop, $240 per year to start and no cap on how high the rent may go in the future. However, Adobe has listened and responded with what I believe is an exceptionally attractive offer. $9.95 per month for the latest versions of both Photoshop and Lightroom, with the promise of no price increases. Ever. We can all speculate as to Adobe's motivation in making this offer, but I could care less why Adobe did it. For all those who screamed when Adobe made its original offer, be happy, you won. Be smart and take advantage. And if you think you may not be able to afford $120 per year in the future for something that's important to you, I think in all candor you have much bigger problems to worry about than Adobe. [G]
-
I understood the original furor when Adobe originally announced the adoption of a subscription based program for Photoshop, $240 per year to start and no cap on how high the rent may go in the future. However, Adobe has listened and responded with what I believe is an exceptionally attractive offer. $9.95 per month for the latest versions of both Photoshop and Lightroom, with the promise of no price increases. Ever.
Is that for the current versions only, or also for the perhaps future version of Photoshop CC XL and Lightroom CC XL (or NG, for new generation)?
Just a friendly warning, try not to be gullible, and don't trust gifts from strange men.
TANSTAAFL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TANSTAAFL). It's only opportunity cost for Adobe in the short term to meet their subscription numbers goal. Wait longer and they'll be giving them away for free. After that, it's gloves off again.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Is that for the current versions only, or also for the perhaps future version of Photoshop CC XL and Lightroom CC XL (or NG, for new generation)?
Just a friendly warning, try not to be gullible, and don't trust gifts from strange men.
TANSTAAFL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TANSTAAFL). It's only opportunity cost for Adobe in the short term to meet their subscription numbers goal. Wait longer and they'll be giving them away for free. After that, it's gloves off again.
Cheers,
Bart
I understand why you have WOLF in your name...all you do is cry wolf. We heard you already...time to change the song.
-
I understand why you have WOLF in your name...all you do is cry wolf. We heard you already...time to change the song.
I've explained why the subscription scheme won't go away (maturity phase in the product lifecycle), and what the business decisions are to motivate such a move. I've told people before that the prices would come down before Dec 31st, and guess what happened ...
I'm now telling you they'll be giving subscriptions away for free or add to the offering (=opportunity cost) if they still fall short of meeting their subscription numbers goal.
It pays to wait ...
But, by all means ignore my advice if you want. In a true democracy, people tend to get the 'government' they vote for.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Is that for the current versions only, or also for the perhaps future version of Photoshop CC XL and Lightroom CC XL (or NG, for new generation)?
As long as you remain a member of Creative Cloud, you will have access to all updates and new versions of the software (including both dot releases, and full new versions).
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
I can understand why for some people the old model is still preferred. But this latest move by Adobe makes it cost effective for me, and I'm much more satisfied with the arrangement. I suspect many others will eventually make the same judgement.
This latest decision seems like a win-win. Photographers who frequently updated both Photoshop and Lightroom will now get them for about the same price as, or less than, the previous retail cost. Adobe will get more photographers who previously used only LR to upgrade to CC, since they will now have access to PS without a prohibitively higher cost. Then as more photographers use PS, they will become a bigger part of the PS customer base, thus wielding more influence on Adobe's marketing strategies.
-
Just a quick clarification, if you took advantage of the $9.99 offer for PS CC, then you will automatically be transitioned to the new offer (i.e. you will get Lightroom). If you have a regular, $19.99 subscription to PS CC, you will need to contact customer support to transition to the new offer.
We are updating the FAQ to make this clearer.
Mike,
Since the FAQ states that suites are not eligible (and that's what I've bought in the past) for the program, I want to make sure that I understand this based on your comment above. If I subscribe today to the single app CC version of Photoshop for $19.99, that can be converted to the new $9.99 offer after the 17th?
Thanks.
Greg
-
Mike,
Since the FAQ states that suites are not eligible (and that's what I've bought in the past) for the program, I want to make sure that I understand this based on your comment above. If I subscribe today to the single app CC version of Photoshop for $19.99, that can be converted to the new $9.99 offer after the 17th?
Yes. You will have to contact support once the new offer is available and they will switch you over.
After posting this, I realized this sounded odd and didn't really make sense. It turned out, our internal FAQ that I got the info from was wrong, and this won't work. If you are on the $19.99 tier of CC, you are only eligible if you also have a previous version of Photoshop since CS3.
Sorry about the confusion.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
So all the photographers who got sucked into Adobe's Creative Suite 3 Product Line are not permitted to use their Photoshop CS3 license (or greater) to sign up for this Photoshop Photography Program? Why on earth would Adobe exclude all these photographers from a CC promotion aimed at photographers? I don't get the logic or benefit of punishing your best customers.
Does Mike, or anybody at Adobe, have an explanation for this?
-
Let me see if my brain is working this lovely Saturday morning.
If an Adobe "suite" buyer since the CS3 release does not own a non-suite version of Photoshop, the only way to take advantage of this Photoshop Photography Program is to sign up today for the Single App CC version and "convert" to the special offer after the 17th, with the help of one of those kind customer service folk from India?
I can't believe what I just wrote, but am I correct?
-
Let me see if my brain is working this lovely Saturday morning.
If an Adobe "suite" buyer since the CS3 release does not own a non-suite version of Photoshop, the only way to take advantage of this Photoshop Photography Program is to sign up today for the Single App CC version and "convert" to the special offer after the 17th, with the help of one of those kind customer service folk from India?
I can't believe what I just wrote, but am I correct?
I just corrected my original post. What I posted was incorrect (our internal FAQ on this was wrong). I have posted the updated info. (Basically, you have to have had a previous perpetual version of Photoshop CS3 or greater).
Sorry about the confusion.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
If you don't own a recent copy of CS then this new offer does not apply to you.
Or in other words, if you've already spent a lot of money on Adobe products then they'll let you get on the rental supply chain for less than if you haven't.
CS2 is 8 years old ! Come on, this offer is a great one. Photoshop and Lightroom are the best you can get in their respective categories. $10/month is not cheap but it is great value. Cheaper options exist. I've tried them, they are not as good. But they are usable if you don't like the new licensing system.
-
I just corrected my original post. What I posted was incorrect (our internal FAQ on this was wrong)...(Basically, you have to have had a previous perpetual version of Photoshop CS3 or greater).
Sorry about the confusion.
Good grief, Mike! Does anyone at Adobe know what the hell they are doing?
I realize you're trying to help, Mike, but honestly, I feel like I'm watching an old Abbott and Costello film with these "pre" announcements coming from all corners. And to pour more salt on the wound, I'm still not clear whether those Adobe customers who acquired Photoshop through their CS3, CS4, CS5, or CS6 Web Premium or Design Premium Suites are eligible for this Photoshop Photography Program offer.
I guess there's no rush to figure this mess out. Most of us have grown accustomed to Adobe's lack of talent for smart and thoughtful communication.
-
Yes, it does sound confusing. I'm very grateful to Mike (and Eric) for helping us out, but it's clear that their internal information is a bit confused. I was also getting contradictory information from those nice people from Mumbai (or wherever) on the online customer support chat.
No wonder the poor old customers are confused!
I think I understand it, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if I find it's different when the sceme is launched in a couple of weeks. And I have no idea whether it's a good deal for me personally. What I want is a return to the scheme a year or so ago, when we could upgrade Photoshop up to 3 past versions, and I could then figure out when Adobe had put enough new stuff into Photoshop to be worth the upgrade. Now they want my money anyway, and I have to take it on trust that it will be worth it for future upgrades.
And what, precisely, is the motivation for Adobe to innovate and improve their products when they've already got our money?
-
Good grief, Mike! Does anyone at Adobe know what the hell they are doing?
I realize you're trying to help, Mike, but honestly, I feel like I'm watching an old Abbott and Costello film with these "pre" announcements coming from all corners. And to pour more salt on the wound, I'm still not clear whether those Adobe customers who acquired Photoshop through their CS3, CS4, CS5, or CS6 Web Premium or Design Premium Suites are eligible for this Photoshop Photography Program offer.
I guess there's no rush to figure this mess out. Most of us have grown accustomed to Adobe's lack of talent for smart and thoughtful communication.
Yes. I am just as frustrated about the complexity of all of this as you are (which is why I am trying to help clarify the info).
If you got PS via a CS3 - 6 suite, you are NOT eligible for this offer. Basically, the offer is for people who have purchased Photoshop by itself in the past.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
Hope that helps..
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
No it does not help me...; so I bought too much adobe stuff in the past and now have to bleed...?
CS3 , CS5 and CS6.... ( the end)
If i am only interested in photoshop from here on why is this offer not valid for me ?
In CS-past it was only slightly more expensive compared to buying only photoshop... It was how the pricing was done..
and this 9,95 offer ; will it be 9,95 forever?
(Adobe what are you doing? do you know yourself ?)
-
Basically, the offer is for people who have purchased Photoshop by itself in the past.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
Or, in other words, this special offer is for photographers who have spent the least amount of money on Adobe products in the past. Thanks for clarifying, Mike. Way to go Adobe!
Please, Mike, can you do some of us a favor? Tell the powers that be at Adobe thanks for nothing. :(
-
I think Adobe assumes most that purchased creative suite are more interested in the entire creative cloud because that's the best way to keep all of the applications they purchased with the suite up to date, which seems logical but certainly isn't always the case. So those who are sort of exceptions to their assumed model end up without what appears to be the same fair options.
Could a suite owner just buy an upgrade to stand alone Photoshop before or once you owned the suite did you have to upgrade the full suite? Did adobe ever offer "downgrades" like this? Seems they are just doing things like they always have, suite owners stay with a "suite" option (the full cloud), PS only or PS/LR users different options (single app upgrades or limited cloud). but I'm not sure how the suite upgrades worked before.
-
Funny... just at the time where I was starting to think that I might just go for it at that price point... I discover that I am not eligible because I bought PS as part of the Creative Suite...
Abode has probably realized that the widespread disgust for CC would result in many photographers downscaling from the Suite to PS+LR only CC offering. Just like me, there are indeed many photographers using InDesign and Dreamweaver very occasionnally who bought into the suite to get our bases covered... but who are not interested in keeping doing this because CC is too expensive.
It is pretty ironic that the fundamental flaws of CC at the level of the Suite will end up killing the efforts to save CC with this new offering for the many photographers owning the suite but using mostly PS...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I think Adobe assumes most that purchased creative suite are more interested in the entire creative cloud
I have no way of knowing the numbers, but every NYC photographer that I know bought into the "suite" for 3 reasons: Photoshop for photos, InDesign for PDFs and Direct Mail, and Dreamweaver for website maintenance or self-design. Photographers had no need to learn entire programs or use every program in a Suite. (Who has that kind of time?) But buying the Suite made financial sense for many small businesses. PhotoExpo has always offered classes to photographers, taught by Adobe employees, to learn a very specific area of each of these programs.
Once you, the photographer, upgraded to Suite (which made Adobe quite happy), you were no longer eligible for individual program upgrades. It was all or nothing. And now, Adobe is once again telling many of its loyal customers, the photographers who purchased Suites, to go f**k themselves. No bone for them.
This sad tale of greed gets more insane by the minute. To make an exciting transition to the Cloud, all Adobe had to do was make the price a no-brainer for small-business photographers. If the price to switch was a no-brainer, this PR disaster never would have taken place, and most everyone would be singing a happy tune.
-
Once you, the photographer, upgraded to Suite (which made Adobe quite happy), you were no longer eligible for individual program upgrades. It was all or nothing. And now, Adobe is once again telling many of its loyal customers, the photographers who purchased Suites, to go f**k themselves. No bone for them.
Again, if you got a suite serial number, you owned the suite, not a stand alone Photoshop serial number. This has always been the policy with suites vs point products. Nothing different with the Photoshop CC point product upgrade...this is old news.
-
Again, if you got a suite serial number, you owned the suite, not a stand alone Photoshop serial number. This has always been the policy with suites vs point products. Nothing different with the Photoshop CC point product upgrade...this is old news.
Jeff,
True, Adobe has the right to limit this offer to non CS Photoshop users.
But the move to CC changes the game in such a way that, if they want to please their photographers customers (which is supposed to be the purpose of this CC discount), then it would be reasonnable to also open this offer to CS owners.
Once again, it feels poorly thought out and half baked.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
But the move to CC changes the game in such a way that, if they want to please their photographers customers (which is supposed to be the purpose of this CC discount), then it would be reasonnable to also open this offer to CS owners.
Well, YOU might think it changes the game, but I don't. It's the same old suite vs point product license issue.
If you have (or had) a Photoshop CS3 or above point product Photoshop serial number, you are entitled to the $9.95 price. If you gave up the point product serial for a Creative Suite serial, you don't own a Photoshop license.
Simple as that...yes, I realize a lot of people ended up buying Suite versions cause they thought they were getting a "deal". But if all you use is Photoshop and Lightroom, giving up a point product serial number for a suite number was foolish.
Sorry, that's the only way I can look at this...either you've got a license to Photoshop or you've got a license to the Creative Suite. The Photoshop CS3 and above is eligible for the $9.95 prince...Creative Suite users, no...
Sorry if you didn't read the fine print...Caveat emptor.
-
Dang it's great to see Jeff back on the forum.
-
Sorry if you didn't read the fine print...Caveat emptor.
The point I am trying to make Jeff is that a lot of the "listening effort" of Abode ends up not being one at all for those photographers having spent the largest amount of cash on their products.
So the small prints are not relevant in this discussion.
This is not about me not understanding what I signed up for, it is about Abode missing another opportunity to show a minimum amount of friendliness to its faithful long term customers.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
If you gave up the point product serial for a Creative Suite serial, you don't own a Photoshop license… Simple as that.
Except, it really wasn't that simple. I don't know a single professional photographer who willingly and knowingly "gave up" anything. Many Suite buyers had no clue they lost individual licenses until they went to upgrade one of the programs within the suite. It's not like Adobe did much to forewarn professionals (or anyone else).
For a shady business operation, "Fine Print" can be used to mislead the consumer. In this case, Adobe had no desire to warn professionals that a CS purchase would mean "giving up" individual licenses. Had Adobe been more aggressive announcing that little caveat, they knew the sales numbers might not reach their goal. Deception for the purpose of making more money. "That's the only way I can look at this."
But if all you use is Photoshop and Lightroom, giving up a point product serial number for a suite number was foolish.
Nice try at calling some Adobe customers "foolish." Nice try at playing dumb. You can't be "foolish" unless you have the power to predict the future. Sorry, sweetie, you're not that gifted. Lightoom launched in January 2007. The CS3 Suite launched in March 2007. Only a handful of people were using LR in March 2007, and most of those people got it for free.
You, Jeff, may claim not to be an Adobe sympathizer, but many of us professionals see through your baloney.
-
You, Jeff, may claim not to be an Adobe sympathizer, but many of us professionals see through your baloney.
Hum, and this helps the discussion how?
You may not like what I say but to the extent possible, I try to tell the truth as I see it. And in terms of reading the fine print, I always read the fine print...I like to completely understand any licensing agreement I get involved in whether I'm selling a license or buying one. At the time of the Suite license bundles, yes, I think a lot of people thought they were getting a real deal–and they were, but they were trading their point product license in for a Suite license.
Yes, I know many people where shocked that their new suite license had to be upgrades as a suite not as point products...whose fault is that? Partially Adobe because they marketed the suites hard, partly the users because they didn't understand what they were licensing. But this has been the policy since the suites were introduced...if you have a suite license, you don't have a Photoshop specific license. Same deal now for the Photoshop CC/Lightroom bundle. You need a Photoshop CS3 or above license to qualify...
-
[...] You need a Photoshop CS3 or above license to qualify...
Jeff, plays it a role whther you have a retail CS3 at least or an upgrade to any older version ?
Best wishes - and thank you very much for being here and giving us such precious information and clarification about many question !
Robert
-
Except, it really wasn't that simple. I don't know a single professional photographer who willingly and knowingly "gave up" anything. Many Suite buyers had no clue they lost individual licenses until they went to upgrade one of the programs within the suite.
Their fault for not reading the facts presented to them. So yes, it really is that simple. Now if you (or they) don't want to take responsibility for accepting the terms of the license, I guess blaming someone else is the best resort, but it doesn't make the 'ignorance is bliss' mentality any more compelling.
Nice try at calling some Adobe customers "foolish."
The shoe fits quite well.
-
I always read the fine print
I do, too. If only I could find a college grad these days who has the patience or the interest.
At the time of the Suite license bundles, yes, I think a lot of people thought they were getting a real deal–and they were, but they were trading their point product license in for a Suite license.
Out of curiosity, I dug up my old CS3 Design Premium box/package, and with magnifier in hand, I can't find this "trade" information anywhere on the product packaging. Digging deeper, this information is not offered on the disc's Read Me file. So, to find it, I suppose you needed to read the license policy that is offered at Install that requires users to click "Accept." Of course, every Adobe executive knows no one reads that thing before installing.
Yes, I know many people where shocked that their new suite license had to be upgrades as a suite not as point products
Buyers were "shocked" for a reason. How could this valuable information to the purchaser be missing from the product's marketing? IMO, Adobe could have communicated this information in a more transparent manner. IMO, their customers who were upgrading from a single license DESERVED better customer service.
whose fault is that?
I've been working in advertising for too many years to take the side of corporate. Deceptive advertising for the sake of making more money has become the norm in America, and many consumers suffer as a result. This behavior is not what I call fair practice. I blame Adobe, because they knew most buyers wouldn't realize they were making a "trade." I also blame Adobe for their current public relations nightmare.
I'm not surprised by those who "blame the customer" when deception practice occurs. I simply consider the source.
-
Jeff, plays it a role whther you have a retail CS3 at least or an upgrade to any older version ?
Any Photoshop CS3 or above version will work...it doesn't matter if it's an upgrade version.
Even though I've had the Master Suite since CS4, I've also always upgraded my single Photoshop license even if I had the suite. I primarily do that because I need Photoshop on 3 computers (even though I usually only use one at a time). So, even though I've now got the full CC suite, I'm also going to upgrade my single Photoshop CS6 to the Photoshop CC/Lightroom bundle. in the past I've also had a Photoshop Windows license for those times I needed to run Photoshop on Windows. Now with the cross-platform license for CC I don't need to worry about that.
-
Their fault for not reading the facts presented to them. So yes, it really is that simple. Now if you (or they) don't want to take responsibility for accepting the terms of the license, I guess blaming someone else is the best resort, but it doesn't make the 'ignorance is bliss' mentality any more compelling. The shoe fits quite well.
I must admit it would have caught me out. We bought the Adobe Web Collection ( PS, Illustrator & GoLive ) with our first computer back in March 2000. We bought Photoshop updates but not the other apps. I know that the Creative Suites are a different kind of product but I use to have a feeling that Adobe weren't the kind of outfit that would trip customers up with 'small print' - their products weren't cheap but customer satisfaction seemed important to them. ( And I'm generally pretty cynical regarding corporations & corporate types ).
Graeme
-
Any Photoshop CS3 or above version will work...it doesn't matter if it's an upgrade version.
Even though I've had the Master Suite since CS4, I've also always upgraded my single Photoshop license even if I had the suite. I primarily do that because I need Photoshop on 3 computers (even though I usually only use one at a time). So, even though I've now got the full CC suite, I'm also going to upgrade my single Photoshop CS6 to the Photoshop CC/Lightroom bundle. in the past I've also had a Photoshop Windows license for those times I needed to run Photoshop on Windows. Now with the cross-platform license for CC I don't need to worry about that.
That cross platform aspect played a part in my cancelling my cancellation of Photoshop CC. I have a Mac desktop and laptop as well as a Win laptop. Up until now I was running Photoshop CS5 on the Win machine. With CC I can have it on both Macs and if I want to use it on the Win machine I let it sign off the Macs temporarily. Works really nice.
The other thing that played into my decision is that I decided that it wouldn't too expensive to purchase another perpetual licensed version of Lightroom if I was to cancel my subscription in the future thus not placing my catalog at risk.
I'm a happy camper now:-)
-
The other thing that played into my decision is that I decided that it wouldn't too expensive to purchase another perpetual licensed version of Lightroom if I was to cancel my subscription in the future thus not placing my catalog at risk.
Hi,
Just a thought. If too many subscribers do not purchase a perpetual license for Lightroom, and wait till a later time when they do not want to, or cannot, continue with a Lightroom CC included subscription, they may find out that there is no longer a perpetual license version, due to lack of interest or a change in policy.
So the only safe approach seems to be to also keep updating the perpetual LR license version, which then effectively turns the Photoshop+LR for photographers subscription into a somewhat less attractively priced Photoshop 'only' subscription.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I try to tell the truth as I see it.
The problem with your view of this is that it isn't the same as a lot ordinary users that are evaluating if they can commit their hard earned money on this.
You're an Adobe evangelist, you sell your product to Adobe (parts of PKS in Lightroom), you make and sell a product specifically for an Adobe product (PKS etc), you make money selling books and tutorial videos about Adobe products and you're an Adobe share holder.
It's hardly an objective unbiased view of this issue.
-
We just received an email from Adobe, announcing their "special" for existing CS customers (as far back as CS3), which will expire Dec 3, 2013. With a 1-year commitment, they are offering Complete Creative Cloud for $29.99 a month. One can only assume when the year is up, the price will jump to $50 a month, the current price for Complete.
What photographer in his right mind, whose business is still struggling since the 2008 financial catastrophe, will want to work on files for 12-months and then face the possibility of having to cancel the service?
Here's the truth: most photographers who bought into the Suite "deal" don't need upgrades to InDesign and Dreamweaver to perform routine tasks. Many photographers do not use the other programs offered in Complete. I'm sure many photographers, possibly thousands who bought into the Suite deal, would like to stay current with Photoshop, but they can't afford to financially commit to Adobe's CC when the business of photography is so expensive and insecure.
The saga continues…
-
It's hardly an objective unbiased view of this issue.
Show where I ever claimed to be "unbiased"? I'm totally biased...(and not for the financial reasons you mention because, well, that really doesn't influence me) but because the Photoshop and Lightroom engineers are friends...and I don't like it when they get dumped on...
BTW, I notice you don't take issue with my statement "I try to tell the truth as I see it."
:~)
-
because the Photoshop and Lightroom engineers are friends...and I don't like it when they get dumped on...
No one here is "dumping on" the software engineers, the very opposite.
The problem is with Adobe's change in sales method. I'm sure that's driven from much higher and deserves every kick it gets.
-
Sorry if you didn't read the fine print...Caveat emptor.
Kind of sounds like a lot of financial institutions, shows exactly with what kind of company you are dealing with. Watch your back or you will be screwed? Shake hands but make sure you count your fingers afterwards?
I have no financial worries of coughing up the monthly fees but I certainly don't feel comfortable enough with Adobe to go into a subscription relationship with them.
I somehow do not feel like a real customer to them....
-
No one here is "dumping on" the software engineers
And I don't think we can stress that point enough.
Frankly, I can't help but feel sorry for the Adobe engineers and be concerned about the utter frustration they must feel through this awkward transition. Reasonable people know that the engineers are not running the company.
If only the suits were as smart and talented as the engineers...
-
Random note: I've been informed that the new bundle deal will be available starting next week (the week of September 16). Just wanted to pass it on.
-
the Photoshop and Lightroom engineers are friends...and I don't like it when they get dumped on...
:~)
Ditto to the other comments regarding this..."dumping on the engineers"? What are you smoking?
No one is dumping on the engineers, we have huge respect for them for what they do, for fronting up to videos, message boards etc and helping to alleviate concerns, advocate for the photographic user of the products which is their focus of their employment and very much their creation ( you mean Thomas has to plead with the execs to get this done... We listen to his every word because we respect his genius etc) and most of all because we can see what they are up against in their place of employment! And we hear from what they say and reading between the lines ( as well as your commentary Jeff which i think is often quite anti adobe the corporation, not the engineers, friends or otherwise) that frustration in all of this matter is clearly not the exclusive domain of some "self centered amateur photographers" ( or similar derogatory terminology that has been used) nor is the confusion (eg Mike Chambers has given Conflicting remarks re the latest offer: undoubtedly in good faith, but maybe the rules are being written as we wait?). So to be clear Jeff this is not an assault on Thomas, Eric etc anymore than if you don't like what happens at the White House it means you want to disband democracy.
Personally, I am glad that the engineers see a silver lining in the freedom from production lining to release dates, but as you and others have noted that is not the reason that the model has changed. When many of us ( Michael R amongst us) saw value to have a 3 year ( skip version) update for PS historically it certainly wasn't the photographers that were driving development to "headline"but less than satisfactory improvement priorities on an 18 month timeline...it was the execs ...presumably...Am I wrong? So the subscription model may give photographers a chance to see over a twelve month ( or longer) timeline if the small interval improvements that are going to be streaming out are worth the ongoing costs. It's no surprise though, present events inparticular, that just as they might have found out x years after moving from PS standalone to a creative suite bundle that their options reduce, that people are a bit sceptical.......so as you say Jeff, "caveat emptor". You got hole in one...that's what much of this now more mature discussion is about, not insulting engineers.
-
Kind of sounds like a lot of financial institutions, shows exactly with what kind of company you are dealing with. Watch your back or you will be screwed? Shake hands but make sure you count your fingers afterwards?
I have no financial worries of coughing up the monthly fees but I certainly don't feel comfortable enough with Adobe to go into a subscription relationship with them.
I somehow do not feel like a real customer to them....
What is your true alternative that will provide the same flexibility and results you get from Adobe?
-
So to be clear Jeff this is not an assault on Thomas, Eric etc anymore than if you don't like what happens at the White House it means you want to disband democracy.
When you or others claim that Adobe won't be interested in advancing development with the subscription model because there's no motivation to make new features, that's a direct slap at the engineers who are indeed motivated by doing good work and advancing the product development regardless of the motivation. Adobe is a corporation filled with people...when you slam the company, you slam the people and some of those people are friends...so I don't take that kindly...
I have not "defended" Adobe's move to the subscription only model, I thought and said it was a bad idea with poor execution. I have tried to explain why they thought they had to do it. Some people refuse to believe the truth because it doesn't fit with their view of Adobe as a money grubbing greedy corporation (which isn't really true although they are really, really cheap :~).
Adobe has made a lot of mistakes that have shot themselves in the foot going way back to the Creative Suite (and even before). Some things I harbor a grudge over–in particular the whole Adobe Stock Photo fiasco...Adobe has a long history of having poor marketing messages and poor executive decisions...none of this is new to the CC situation. But I don't see Adobe as an evil empire because I know the people at Adobe and they really do try to do the right thing. Sometimes they don't but not for the reasons so many people who hate Adobe seem to think.
Photoshop (and Illustrator and InDesign and the other apps) are so successful in spite of everything Adobe does, not because of what Adobe does. It's the engineers and product managers who drive the product to be the best it can be. And in spite of all the stumbles and bad decisions made by Adobe, their applications are still the industry leading apps.
Time will tell if Adobe has made a crucial mistake that sees Adobe falling back and new competitors step to the front. The real secret weapon Adobe still has is their engineers teams like Thomas and Eric (and the many, many Photoshop engineers).
While you may not like the subscription model, I think it's here to stay so your only real choice is to adapt or move on...I've looked at all the other Photoshop-like apps recently and there's nothing else I can possibly use instead of Photoshop.
-
When you or others claim that Adobe won't be interested in advancing development with the subscription model because there's no motivation to make new features, that's a direct slap at the engineers who are indeed motivated by doing good work and advancing the product development regardless of the motivation. Adobe is a corporation filled with people...when you slam the company, you slam the people and some of those people are friends..
Well Jeff others may have said that but I didn't! What I said was buyer beware ( quoting you in agreement, because you don't know what the ramifications might be. And as an aside nor could anyone know as you even said adobe didn't think about this bundle on offer at the beginning of the subscription and that Thomas has been working behind the scenes for months pushing for it etc)
I'm not suggesting all of us have the same concerns or needs.. But we can learn from the discussion which, a few outliers excepted, is pretty constructive and usually limited by lack of certainty, lets face it!
The rest of your reply goes on to why one might beware..stock options, and succeeding despite itself, poor communication and executive decisions..you are the one who has informed us . I was simply agreeing that the talent of the creative/engineers is the value, and not withstanding your suggestion that to criticise Adobe is a " direct slap" in the face of these great people which I disagree with you about, I was explicitly now and before saying I appreciate them and their huge contribution to create this and undoubtedly behind the scenes support the photographers case ( access, concerns, product feedback that Eric says is being folded into development pipeline) thats pretty straight forward thanks isnt it? THANKS!
Btw I have little doubt about motivation, these guys seem to love doing a great job ( and you know that better than I) and they have stated now an impediment to doing the bits they want to has been removed ( removed by their management also people who also work for adobe). We can judge it by the results plain and simple. The decision is get on now or wait to see how it pans out. lr4 ( and probably 5 to come) and cs5 is fine for me, but improvements if helpful at my level and wants will be welcomed etc.
Hey, subscription as a model won't/ can't work or suit everyone, anymore than perpetual suits adobe anymore.
I'm cool with that....
-
What is your true alternative that will provide the same flexibility and results you get from Adobe?
quite frankly there is none, speak about a monopoly and taking advantage of it... There is a very fine line between using that advantage and abusing it. The relation between Adobe and their 'customers' is not particularly healthy because of that, IMO.
-
quite frankly there is none, speak about a monopoly and taking advantage of it... There is a very fine line between using that advantage and abusing it. The relation between Adobe and their 'customers' is not particularly healthy because of that, IMO.
Hi,
The answer also depends on one's definition of a 'true alternative'. Several alternatives give better results than Photoshop does. They are therefore not 'true' alternatives, but better alternatives. Unfortunately, these alternatives could also perform worse on other aspects (e.g. less convenient workflow but better quality output). So it depends on how much weight one attaches to the different aspects of an alternative. The question is therefore impossible to answer in general, and for everybody. It depends on the particular situation.
Cheers,
Bart
-
When you or others claim that Adobe won't be interested in advancing development with the subscription model because there's no motivation to make new features, that's a direct slap at the engineers who are indeed motivated by doing good work and advancing the product development regardless of the motivation. Adobe is a corporation filled with people...when you slam the company, you slam the people and some of those people are friends...so I don't take that kindly...
The argument is not that the subscription model means that the software engineers will relax and stop innovating, it's that the mangement will decide that there should be fewer engineers (or at least fewer engineers working on the stuff that people in this forum are interested in) because engineers are expensive so should be taken off work that leads to no additional revenue.
I would guess that the stuff that the management would think could promote the growth of Adobe is the cloud plumbing -- transferring work to and from mobile devices, etc -- and the business intelligence side of the business (ironically), not more camera raw features.
Adobe will not want to get left high and dry, as Microsoft has found itself, putting resources into a declining segment of the market (the world of PCs and digital cameras) when a new way of working is prospering (mobile).
-
The argument is not that the subscription model means that the software engineers will relax and stop innovating, it's that the mangement will decide that there should be fewer engineers (or at least fewer engineers working on the stuff that people in this forum are interested in) because engineers are expensive so should be taken off work that leads to no additional revenue.
I would guess that the stuff that the management would think could promote the growth of Adobe is the cloud plumbing -- transferring work to and from mobile devices, etc -- and the business intelligence side of the business (ironically), not more camera raw features.
Adobe will not want to get left high and dry, as Microsoft has found itself, putting resources into a declining segment of the market (the world of PCs and digital cameras) when a new way of working is prospering (mobile).
Yes Adobe most likely is looking really hard into the future with cloud storage and mobile devices...and I am really glad they are. We need to keep moving forward and it is companies like Adobe that keep us going forward. Wouldn't it be a sad day if all camera manufactures moved at the pace Kodak did when transitioning to digital. I personally see a huge potential with cloud storage and nice portable devices that I can not only display my photos on...but actually do image processing on, all without having to have my entire library of photos with me.
Please Adobe, keep moving forwards....
-
I can some benefits cloud computing could bring, but serious editing of photos on mobile devices won't be one of them for me until mobile devices come with 26" monitors.
-
When you or others claim that Adobe won't be interested in advancing development with the subscription model because there's no motivation to make new features, that's a direct slap at the engineers who are indeed motivated by doing good work and advancing the product development regardless of the motivation. Adobe is a corporation filled with people...when you slam the company, you slam the people and some of those people are friends...so I don't take that kindly...
For you to make that statement shows that you are either naive about the development process in a major corporation....or believe we are.
Development projects have budgets, which are driven by the return ( profit/ revenue ) expected from them. Thomas, in the recent video interview with Michael, mentioned the marketing driven "demo-able" features that they needed to work on for each major release. Unsaid, but alluded to was that these tied up work that could have been better spent in other areas.
Questioning Adobe's future action....that is the actions of a profit driven corporation...in no way reflects on the creative workers in the trenches. It is not unreasonable to fear that once the subscription model is driven into our hearts that Adobe...the corporation...could not "cash cow" the product.
I have not "defended" Adobe's move to the subscription only model, I thought and said it was a bad idea with poor execution. I have tried to explain why they thought they had to do it. Some people refuse to believe the truth because it doesn't fit with their view of Adobe as a money grubbing greedy corporation (which isn't really true although they are really, really cheap :~).
In the beginning, you attempted, unreasonably, to beat down all complaints. In fact, you probably did more to feed the flames then the actual action by Adobe did.
-
When you or others claim that Adobe won't be interested in advancing development with the subscription model because there's no motivation to make new features, that's a direct slap at the engineers
That's quite a leap...engineers receive their marching orders from higher up the chain. No one on this forum is denigrating the efforts and motivations of the people in the trenches, but they do have to focus on what comes down from their superiors and that is the part of the Adobe structure that many of us have lost faith in. I certainly hope this expressed concern is misplaced, but I sympathize with and understand those who worry.
-
That's quite a leap...engineers receive their marching orders from higher up the chain.
Who do you think gives Thomas Knoll his matching orders? (hint, it's Thomas Knoll)
The top Photoshop engineers are now more in control of what will developed than they've been since Photoshop 7, the last non-suite version of Photoshop. Ever since CS, it was indeed the suite product management that dictated the dev time and schedule that dictated what features could or couldn't be done. That has now all changed back to Photoshop being in charge of what and when new features will be added to Photoshop.
-
That's quite a leap...engineers receive their marching orders from higher up the chain.
I'm not sure. I really don't believe some 'suit' said to the Photoshop team "come up with Shake Reduction" or PV2012, or Content Aware Fill. I would suspect that engineers do receive the marching orders from higher up the chain to come up with useful feature we end users want. Not much more specific however.
-
if it's like any of the large multinational companies I know, who ever controls the budget controls the amount of development. That's not to say they necessarily control what they develop, but I would think they have a strong say in it. ;)
and ultimately, any company that's floated on the stock exchange, well, they have a whole other group to please.
-
For you to make that statement shows that you are either naive about the development process in a major corporation....or believe we are.
Development projects have budgets, which are driven by the return ( profit/ revenue ) expected from them. Thomas, in the recent video interview with Michael, mentioned the marketing driven "demo-able" features that they needed to work on for each major release. Unsaid, but alluded to was that these tied up work that could have been better spent in other areas.
Questioning Adobe's future action....that is the actions of a profit driven corporation...in no way reflects on the creative workers in the trenches. It is not unreasonable to fear that once the subscription model is driven into our hearts that Adobe...the corporation...could not "cash cow" the product.
In the beginning, you attempted, unreasonably, to beat down all complaints. In fact, you probably did more to feed the flames then the actual action by Adobe did.
And I thought I was on a photography forum...my mistake I guess.
-
That's quite a leap...engineers receive their marching orders from higher up the chain. No one on this forum is denigrating the efforts and motivations of the people in the trenches, but they do have to focus on what comes down from their superiors and that is the part of the Adobe structure that many of us have lost faith in. I certainly hope this expressed concern is misplaced, but I sympathize with and understand those who worry.
It appears Adobe engineers may be more empowered than many other companies. At Photoshop World, I was having a sandwich and the only seats were at a small table with one person, so my friend and I ask if we could sit there. Shortly after the normal banter I notice he's wearing an Adobe shirt, which of course changed the direction of the discussion. He mentioned he was an engineer at the Adobe "codathon" booth, a booth where engineers were seeking input and indeed doing some coding from Adobe users. He was extremely inquisitive about things we thought would help Photoshop, and when I mentioned that PS should somehow adopt some of LR's color management features, especially the one of allowing users to see only the output profiles we want when printing I could see he was really listening closely. This went on for 30 minutes. Great guy, fun conversation (including a brief discussion of the entire CC thing).
When we were finished I ask him for a card, I was surprised to find out he was being a little modest, as it was David Hackel, Photoshop Engineering Manager (4th name in the credits when you do about Photoshop.
-
When we were finished I ask him for a card, I was surprised to find out he was being a little modest, as it was David Hackel, Photoshop Engineering Manager (4th name in the credits when you do about Photoshop.
Yep, that's the way the Photoshop engineers are...they eat, drink and poop Photoshop.
(well, you know what I mean).
:~)
-
It appears Adobe engineers may be more empowered than many other companies. At Photoshop World, I was having a sandwich and the only seats were at a small table with one person, so my friend and I ask if we could sit there. Shortly after the normal banter I notice he's wearing an Adobe shirt, which of course changed the direction of the discussion. He mentioned he was an engineer at the Adobe "codathon" booth, a booth where engineers were seeking input and indeed doing some coding from Adobe users. He was extremely inquisitive about things we thought would help Photoshop, and when I mentioned that PS should somehow adopt some of LR's color management features, especially the one of allowing users to see only the output profiles we want when printing I could see he was really listening closely. This went on for 30 minutes. Great guy, fun conversation (including a brief discussion of the entire CC thing).
When we were finished I ask him for a card, I was surprised to find out he was being a little modest, as it was David Hackel, Photoshop Engineering Manager (4th name in the credits when you do about Photoshop.
Wayne, we used to have many engineers, engineering mgmt, marketing, execs, etc. at major product shows.
All of them were "empowered". That is, they had input to the product plan.....what the market needs and what was possible to build.
In most cases, what wants to get in the plan vs. the budget available is akin to fitting 10 lbs into a 5 lbs bag....the ones tat get in the bag are drive by those which will garner the most revenue.....and those which meet the financial expectations of return on investment. When they don't meet ROI and/or when purses are tight the bag can shrink to 2 lbs....even maintenance only.
-
And I thought I was on a photography forum...my mistake I guess.
Have you been reading this thread???
-
Have you been reading this thread???
Exactly....
-
And I thought I was on a photography forum...my mistake I guess.
Yes, your mistake. Try reading the forum's title - it's "digital image processing". How narrowly do you want to define that?
-
Yes, your mistake. Try reading the forum's title - it's "digital image processing". How narrowly do you want to define that?
Maybe we could actually discuss image processing rather than how energetic Adobe engineers are since we know dick about Adobe engineers.
-
since we know dick about Adobe engineers.
Given some of them are participants here, those of us that have been here a while are starting to learn quite a bit about them and how they work.
If you don't like the way things are discussed here, there are plenty of other web forums for you.
-
Wayne, we used to have many engineers, engineering mgmt, marketing, execs, etc. at major product shows.
All of them were "empowered". That is, they had input to the product plan.....what the market needs and what was possible to build.
In most cases, what wants to get in the plan vs. the budget available is akin to fitting 10 lbs into a 5 lbs bag....the ones tat get in the bag are drive by those which will garner the most revenue.....and those which meet the financial expectations of return on investment. When they don't meet ROI and/or when purses are tight the bag can shrink to 2 lbs....even maintenance only.
I'm unfamiliar with your background and what company you are referring to, but I will say I've never seen a high level Adobe engineer working an Adobe booth before. I did get to meet Eric Chan at a Photoshop world once which was a nice surprise, but this case it was a dedicated booth staffed with engineers seeking feedback on what users would like to see. Normally Adobe doesn't send engineers, they send evangelists.
As far as budgets, I don't believe the normal software development/upgrade cycle fits, as they now are looking for constant improvements frequently. How they handle this will have a big role in the success of the cloud model, but it does seem their development budget process may be undergoing a drastic revision from typical software companies.
I do believe the engineers and others are more empowered with this new CC model than before to address real issues, needs and wants.
-
I do believe the engineers and others are more empowered with this new CC model than before to address real issues, needs and wants.
That may very well be the case ... however, should the flow of revenue slow or diminish, you can rest assured that the empowerment in question will also diminish at an equal rate.
-
Who do you think gives Thomas Knoll his matching orders? (hint, it's Thomas Knoll)
The top Photoshop engineers are now more in control of what will developed than they've been since Photoshop 7, the last non-suite version of Photoshop.
so mr Knoll can make a non subscription model of PS happen ? good to know.... otherwise nobody was doubting purely technical stuff side.
-
so mr Knoll can make a non subscription model of PS happen ? good to know....
He did once...and I suspect he could do a new non-Photoshop pixel editing app if he wanted to. But in terms of the subscription model, he doesn't mind the subscription only model (he just was unhappy with the way Adobe did it). Don't underestimate what Thomas can do if he sets his mind to it...he wields enormous power and influence at Adobe.
-
I was resistent to the original suite offer because it cost way too much for a product that I only used occasionally (PS), and there were a lot of unresolved questions about what happens if you go off-grid for a few months, etc. This offer more or less parallels what I'd probably pay anyway -- PS upgrades every 2-3 years, LR upgrades as they come along, so I'll probably go for it. I do think they should also offer an annual billing, if they don't ($9.99 x 12) so that if something does go wrong with your credit card billing cycle, as Thom Hogan says happened to him, at least the chances of a problem would be reduced. I have to say I'm not too impressed with the 20GB cloud offer -- I have thumb drives bigger than that. 20TB would have been interesting.
But, I'll probably do it. In fact, I'm sure I will, if I don't drop dead in the next week. As for all the questions about whether we'll get upgrades and so on, I don't much care, because PS/LR does pretty much everything I need, right now, and if they just do maintenance forever, that'd be okay with me.
However, I don't believe Adobe when they say the price is good forever. When interest and inflation rates get back to normal, which looks like it'll be in the next year or two, you can expect that the value of the dollar relative to what it will buy will drop about 3% a year or so...which would be a real loss to Adobe, and a real gain for the rest of us. I doubt they will tolerate the loss, so at some point, "forever" will end...I suspect that will come along in perhaps five years. As for the "you should have read the fine print argument," what a bunch of BS. That fine print is designed NOT to be read, and I doubt that more than a small fraction of 1% actually does read it. Even if you did read, say, the CS3 fine print, would that mention the possibility of giving up your license for a product that didn't even exist back then? Maybe, but why would you pay attention to that, or remember it?
Still, with all the obvious objections, I'll buy it anyway, for now, and worry about it in five years.
Oh, yeah, one more question. I have two photo processing stations, and also a laptop, all Macs. What provisions are there for using your various machines with the subscription suite? Can you sign off and on like you do with the stand-alone products?
-
He did once...and I suspect he could do a new non-Photoshop pixel editing app if he wanted to.
Fingers crossed...
-
Fingers crossed...
there is a difference between ability to code one (which he can and nobody doubts, one-two man teams do things like PhotoLine) and actually making that application within Adobe realm... by the way, I always miss a junior one - that PSE(lements), is that also a subscription only like PS ?
-
He did once...
he did once what ? averted a subscription model only several years ago ?
-
Oh, yeah, one more question. I have two photo processing stations, and also a laptop, all Macs. What provisions are there for using your various machines with the subscription suite? Can you sign off and on like you do with the stand-alone products?
You can have it on as many machines as you own as long as only 2 are signed in (aka activated). You can also have cross platform installs. I find this very convenient as I have a Mac desktop and laptop and a Win laptop (that I use occasionally). When you start up the 3rd instance a dialog pops up and offers to sign your other machines off if you are already signed in on 2 other machines.
-
You can also have cross platform installs.
Which is new thanks to CC subscription. Not that pointing out a benefit of this new model is very popular.
-
he did once what ?
Wrote Photoshop which was released as a perpetual license product...
BTW, are you trying to be obtuse or did not really not get wheat I said?
-
Wrote Photoshop which was released as a perpetual license product...
BTW, are you trying to be obtuse or did not really not get wheat I said?
well, what he did once many years ago (and that was a technical feat - nobody is questioning technical capabilities) has nothing to do w/ a question... so who is obtusing?
-
Which is new thanks to CC subscription. Not that pointing out a benefit of this new model is very popular.
dear, remote activation has nothing to do w/ subscriotion model... you can have crossplatform remote activation w/ perpetual licenses.
-
dear, remote activation has nothing to do w/ subscriotion model... you can have crossplatform remote activation w/ perpetual licenses.
I stand corrected. However, cross platform serial's started with creative cloud meaning PS 6. That is the only perceptual license version that supports both Mac and Win.
-
dear, remote activation has nothing to do w/ subscriotion model... you can have crossplatform remote activation w/ perpetual licenses.
Not unless you fork over the money for a Windows and an OS X license. That particular constraint isn't present in CC.
-
I stand corrected. However, cross platform serial's started with creative cloud meaning PS 6. That is the only perceptual license version that supports both Mac and Win.
I do not argue w/ that... but it is again just purely political/financial (for profit, to move move people to subscription only model) decision not caused by any technical (software or accounting) reasons...
-
I'm guessing Schewe already knows this but in case others haven't noticed, the ULA for the Adobe CC App Mgr seems to only display in a small window sized for an iPhone and, when extracted, results in 26 Word pages of single line-spaced 12 point text.
I stopped reading when a coworker reading the same on his separate machine took the link regarding fonts. He seemed to understand a user was not supposed to use certain fonts, though they were supplied by Adobe, because they are "restricted." We went searching further via links and then happened upon the ULA for Illustrator CS6 and the PDF is well over 600 pages of very small text and starts with a language, maybe Arabic.
That's when I called it day.
-
I thought this was USA only as checked Adobe UK website and cheapest CC option is £27.34 pcm (about $40). Yet linked press release quotes UK price of £7.14pcm?
On the basis that I might before have paid about £50 every 2 years to update LR, it equates to about £60 a year to keep Photoshop up to date, which funnily enough is equivalent to paying c.£180 every 3 years to move to newer version of PS. (Which of course is the option no longer available)
On the face of it I give Adobe some credit for listening and bringing the cost to the amateur back to, approximately, where it was before - well better really because you need to take into account the reduction in the cost of LR since summer 2012. :)
-
I thought this was USA only as checked Adobe UK website and cheapest CC option is £27.34 pcm (about $40). Yet linked press release quotes UK price of £7.14pcm?
The new PS/LR combination is not yet available. The £27.34 introductory offer is for the whole CC package, it's £47 otherwise. Not sure why they don't have the info on the website that a new PS offer is forthcoming.
-
The new package will be available next week.
-
thx. That implies LR5.2 as well?
-
thx. That implies LR5.2 as well?
See http://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/ (http://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/), which includes "This offer will be available the week of September 16th at the same time we introduce the new version of Lightroom 5.2."
-
It's only opportunity cost for Adobe in the short term to meet their subscription numbers goal.
The pressure is rising for Adobe to meet their number of subscribers goal by year end.
Less than 2 weeks later --
... Adobe exited Q3 with 1 million 31 thousand paid Creative Cloud subscriptions, an increase of 331 thousand when compared to the number of subscriptions as of the end of Q2 fiscal year 2013 ...
... “We exceeded one million subscriptions during Q3, demonstrating that the transition to Creative Cloud is happening sooner than expected,” said Shantanu Narayen, president and chief executive officer, Adobe.
pdf Adobe Q3 FY2013 earnings press release (http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/pdfs/201309/Q313Earnings.pdf)