Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: indusphoto on April 21, 2015, 06:34:24 pm
-
A couple of years ago when Adobe moved from CS6 to CC, they promised that Lightroom will always remain a stand-alone product. There were many debates about that on this forum with many voicing doubt and some defending Adobe.
With the release of LR6 (nay LR CC) it is becoming clear that it is only a matter of time before standalone Lightroom is put to sleep for good. Today I was browsing the Adobe website and there is no place that I could find where I could download a trial of Lightroom 6. All indications are that I have to sign for a CC trial to try out new Lightroom. This means that I need to sign up for adobe account, give them my credit card, and then remember to cancel the subscription before 30 days end. Moreover, there are reports that when CC is installed and uninstalled, it causes issues with existing installation of Lightroom 5.
So I am thinking why spend any more time on Lightroom. If it is a dead-end product, it might be worth spending money on another company's product which at least has a commitment to on-going support of their product.
-
If it is a dead-end product, it might be worth spending money on another company's product which at least has a commitment to on-going support of their product.
C1 will be there too, eventually... so what is the competition ? Corel's AfterShot Pro ?
-
I can't see how to buy new version at all outright. I'm still using Photoshop CS5 for the same reason. I have no interest in a subscription model Adobe is begging me to stop giving them money with this new model.
-
Their live support gave me link to it. I could not seem to find it on my own
https://www.adobe.com/products/catalog/software._sl_id-contentfilter_sl_catalog_sl_software_sl_mostpopular.html
-
I also see that B&H has it for $149 on their website now - it is still available as stand-alone product, at least for now.
By the bye - Capture 1 also offers the subscription model - $10/month (special discount from $15/month) for the next year.
-
This means that I need to sign up for adobe account, give them my credit card, and then remember to cancel the subscription before 30 days end.
Not so. Adobe does not ask for a credit card when signing up for the CC trial. Simply sign up, download Lightroom, and once downloaded you have a standalone version of Lightroom and never have to start up CC again.
-
With the release of LR6 (nay LR CC) it is becoming clear that it is only a matter of time before standalone Lightroom is put to sleep for good.
Based on what data points, the name?
-
Based on what data points, the name?
Based on the fact that it is next to impossible for anyone to figure out how to download Lightroom 6 trial, or buy an upgrade. People are also having difficulty finding out how to purchase full license. However if you want to subscribe to CC, it is all there in big bold letters on Adobe website, and every press release link.
If this is not Adobe telling customers to forget LR6, then it is a really bad message that they have crafted. There is also a mention from Scott Kelby that this is the last perpetual version, which adds to the perception.
-
Based on the fact that it is next to impossible for anyone to figure out how to download Lightroom 6 trial, or buy an upgrade.
There is also a mention from Scott Kelby that this is the last perpetual version, which adds to the perception.
Neither are facts, mostly FUD and nonsense from Kelby.
-
With the release of LR6 (nay LR CC) it is becoming clear that it is only a matter of time before standalone Lightroom is put to sleep for good.
Maybe, maybe not. I don't see why it matters.
Aperture was standalone licensing, and it didn't stop Apple from shutting down development. Standalone licensing is clearly an insufficient hedge against future abandonment.
The chances that Adobe will shut down its activation servers, out of the blue, with no notice, and crippling tens of thousands of working professionals, is very slim. Even if they were going out of business, users will have more than enough time to migrate data to a competing product.
So I am thinking why spend any more time on Lightroom.
That's your choice.
That said... Your reaction doesn't sound particularly rational. If you can migrate your catalogs to another program with minimal loss of data and minimal downtime, why do you need to change because you're merely worried that you'll have to migrate your catalogs at some later date? Will it take less time to do it now, than at some future date which may never arrive?
Any piece of software that your workflow or entire business relies on could be abandoned by its developer at any time. Are you going to change your process every 6 months, to ward off that mere possibility?
If it is a dead-end product, it might be worth spending money on another company's product which at least has a commitment to on-going support of their product.
Lightroom isn't a "dead-end product." It's got just as long a future as any other catalog/RAW developer app.
Rather than panicking about things that might never happen, I'd suggest you figure out what tools work for you, and don't worry about the future.
-
Well stated Mousecop! Some just have to live in fear and FUD. The damn product hasn't been out 24 hours. Let's all take a deep breath and get the facts from Adobe, not some shill who so far today, has caused more incorrect information about LR than much else.
-
Hi
LR6 definitely available to buy as download here https://www.adobe.com/uk/cart.html?marketSegment=COM&# note this in geog specific as I am in the UK but I started at the USA site and changed location :) HTH
Incidently, I am waiting to see whether they will offer the physical package as they did when I upgraded to LR5 for LR4. In regard to a trial I think there was such a download with LR5?
-
Incidently, I am waiting to see whether they will offer the physical package as they did when I upgraded to LR5 for LR4. In regard to a trial I think there was such a download with LR5?
I think the full versions will be available in a physical package. But the upgrades are available only as downloads directly from Adobe.
-
LR6 definitely available to buy as download ...
Yes ... but we all have to admit it is a pure scavenger hunt on the Adobe site for a visitor to find Lr 6 perpetual license version on their own. Not to mention you have to interpret the purchase settings to seek out an upgrade purchase vs full version. The whole procedure as offered is not very user friendly. It is quite reasonable to think that by such placement and situation, Adobe is trying to make such purchases as difficult as possible and would prefer to see a quick end to the perpetual license offering.
Thinking that a subscription only situation for Lr will arrive sooner, rather than later is not an outlandish conclusion based upon this evidence ... even though Adobe has not publicly stated as much.
As we can recall ... there was no indication that CS perpetual licensing would end prior to the announcement of CC only in 2013. To be confident that Lr will be offered in a perpetual license indefinitely may just be wishful thinking.
-
Is it possible to download a version of Lightroom 6 which does not require the installation of AAM and all the associated cruft?
It's egregious the way this thing is packaged. AAM and associated tools install NEW FEWER than 4 separate binaries, most of them redundant. It is all over the place, and there are many persistent running processes.
LR 5 bundled with CS could run without Adobe Creative Cloud installed. It doesn't appear LR CC can do this. Adobe told me that LR 6 could, however, but the download seems to install AAM and require it. Anyone figured out a way to get LR 6 STANDALONE (i.e. without AAM filling your /Applications/Utilitity folder with 3 folders and 1000 subfolders full of binaries)? I can't overstate how bad this is.
-
Some just have to live in fear and FUD.
While others are naive.
I spent 30 minutes on Adobe.com trying to give them my $79. Then I spent 10 minutes with on support chat, trying to explain that not every customer lives in the US. He hung up on me.
It seems that Adobe goes out of their way to make me _not_ purchase lightroom 6, but rather lightroom cc. You may interpret it any way you like but for rational beings, this says a lot about how they see the future.
For the software industry, this is great (they are ignoring part of the market). For me personally this is sad.
-
It might be a local issue. Here in Australia it took me less than 1 minute to find how to buy/upgrade the LR6 standalone (https://www.adobe.com/au/products/catalog/software._sl_id-contentfilter_sl_catalog_sl_software_sl_photoshopcollection_au.html) . Not that I'm interested because I'm a happy CC customer.
-
Yes ... but we all have to admit it is a pure scavenger hunt on the Adobe site for a visitor to find Lr 6 perpetual license version on their own.
Not at all. I just went to the Adobe store, scrolled to Lightroom and clicked 'buy'. Just as easy as it's ever been.
To get a trial version you'll need to work through the CC registration process, but why bother ? The upgrade is cheaper than a tank of fuel for your car and you'll probably buy it anyway.
-
This is a really useful site for adobe downloads
http://prodesigntools.com/
All installation file and updates.
Keith
-
Yes ... but we all have to admit it is a pure scavenger hunt on the Adobe site for a visitor to find Lr 6 perpetual license version on their own. Not to mention you have to interpret the purchase settings to seek out an upgrade purchase vs full version. The whole procedure as offered is not very user friendly. It is quite reasonable to think that by such placement and situation, Adobe is trying to make such purchases as difficult as possible and would prefer to see a quick end to the perpetual license offering.
Thinking that a subscription only situation for Lr will arrive sooner, rather than later is not an outlandish conclusion based upon this evidence ... even though Adobe has not publicly stated as much.
I agree. The process is deliberately needlessly complicated for those who do not want a subscription version.
In fact, I tried downloading the "desktop only version" and got confusing dialogs, asking me to select a program on my harddisk, instead of downloading an installer for the program (LR6) I already selected. I'm not going to risk ruining my current LR5 setup if/when I decide to remove LR6 or not purchase a licence, so I declined to play along on their terms (and my risk/cost).
It was fun while it lasted, but I'm happy that I switched to Capture One Pro as my main Rawconverter quite some time ago. For the time being, they (Phase One) are much less aggressive, and the conversion quality and editing options do rock (and -as hard as that is- are getting better all the time). Their support, should it be needed, is usually pretty good and quick. I'm an overall happy user on that front.
Cheers,
Bart
-
For those in UK who want to upgrade their standalone LR, the quickest and cheapest way to do it, based on previous upgrades) is to download the trial and then buy a physical upgrade version on disc from Amazon. Use the key from the disc package to register the downloaded trial.
The reason is that if you "buy" the download you get it from Adobe in Ireland and pay VAT at the higher Irish rate of 25%. Buy the disc from Amazon.co.uk and you pay VAT at the lower British rate.
Crazy!!
-
I can't see how to buy new version at all outright. I'm still using Photoshop CS5 for the same reason. I have no interest in a subscription model Adobe is begging me to stop giving them money with this new model.
All you do is go to the Lightroom pages at the Adobe website. Scroll down to the bottom. There you will see all the purchase options including the buy standalone option.
-
It's so messy that I wrote some instructions with screenshots here (http://lightroomsolutions.com/lightroom-6-perpetual/).
You must go to the Products page ( USA (https://www.adobe.com/products/catalog/software._sl_id-contentfilter_sl_catalog_sl_software_sl_mostpopular.html) UK (https://www.adobe.com/uk/products/catalog/software._sl_id-contentfilter_sl_catalog_sl_software_sl_photoshopcollection.html) or wherever) and ensure you click the Buy button.
Be careful not to click the link to Photoshop Lightroom 6 as that just takes you back to Adobe’s standard Lightroom page where you get pushed towards CC.
-
Neither are facts, mostly FUD and nonsense from Kelby.
Why are you so reluctant to admit the possibility that Lightroom will one day be subscription only, just as Photoshop is now? And sooner, rather than later?
Yes, official word from Adobe would be the best. But are they likely to announce loudly that Lightroom 6 is the last standalone version, even if it was?
To me, anyway, the circumstantial evidence is strong:
It is none too obvious how to buy Lightroom 6 on Adobe's own site
It is even harder to figure out how to upgrade from Lightroom 5 to Lightroom 6
At the same time, it is simplicity to get on board with Lightroom CC
The rest of Adobe's entire professional graphics product line is subscription only
How long is "indefinitely" in Adobe's mind (or market-speak)? Until version 7 in two more years?
Lightroom 5 (standalone) and 6 do not allow mobile syncing when mobile is "the future."
We'll know for sure, in time. But I think it would be wise for serious Photographers to come to grips with the possibility that Lightroom 7 will never come. And be making their photo management and editing plan with that in mind.
That doesn't mean to abandon Lightroom now, far from it. Lightroom is the "best available" solution to an integrated DAM, Development and Output need on the market today. IMHO.
-
Just another opinion from another Adobe Lightroom evangelist at this link
http://laurashoe.com/2015/04/21/which-should-i-buy-lightroom-cc-2015-or-lightroom-6/?mc_cid=b6d97d7495&mc_eid=5e4ed2842f
I am however left in limbo since I cannot purchase the subscription option since Adobe does not do business in the country where I live so I have no efficient method of making the monthly payments.
My only option is to purchase with a one time payment through a third party seller and have the product shipped.
-
Why are you so reluctant to admit the possibility that Lightroom will one day be subscription only, just as Photoshop is now? And sooner, rather than later?
Yes, official word from Adobe would be the best. But are they likely to announce loudly that Lightroom 6 is the last standalone version, even if it was?
It appears I need to answer differently based on the two Bob Rockefeller's above. One is the Bob who's poor oxygen deprived brain from the Kelby mess posted Scott's FUD in post #2 "Lightroom CC Now Release" http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=99711.80 and the Bob who's brain has received adequate oxygen.
First I'm not at all reluctant to admit the possibility that LR will go subscription only and have never said otherwise! Now, for the 2nd Bob, yes, official word from Adobe is not only best, it's the only way I'll operate and suggest you do as well.
The first Bob posted some text from Kelby not Adobe that only added FUD to a forum post and I nearly got sucked into that nonsense vortex. Until I read what Scott wrote (my bad) and realized not only isn't it official and poorly written, it doesn't break any new ground. This 'behavior' is how LR and other Adobe products have operated for years!
Can LR go subscription only? Of course. Will it? Perhaps. When the time comes, and I doubt we'll see this until there's a much bigger carrot (LR7) and that's admitted speculation, I'll do what I always do when considering an upgrade: figure out the cost to benefit ratio. Could Adobe spring subscription on LR6? Sure. And doing so after the official release would be rather dumb. But it isn't impossible. As such a time as this or that happens, why the FUD? There's a forum on LuLa here, this isn't that forum.
I'm not defending past Adobe changes in terms of how they handle software. They offer a product we all have to decide whether we wish to buy into or move on. And I'll not rant about what they may do in the future.
To me, anyway, the circumstantial evidence is strong:
It is none too obvious how to buy Lightroom 6 on Adobe's own site
Obvious or impossible?
It is even harder to figure out how to upgrade from Lightroom 5 to Lightroom 6
Hard or impossible?
How long is "indefinitely" in Adobe's mind (or market-speak)? Until version 7 in two more years?
Don't know, I'll deal with it when that happens, I suggest you do the same. In the meantime, how about actually working with LR6 (or moving on) and using the forum for it's intended purpose, answering questions or asking them! I've almost got my catalog keyworded with Fact Detection and I like the feature. It will make finding certain images much easier for me.
Lightroom 5 (standalone) and 6 do not allow mobile syncing when mobile is "the future."
The future predicted flying cars. IMHO, LR Mobile is a huge waste of time and engineering resources. IF you feel it's the future and super important to you, stick with Adobe no matter the software delivery and cost OR move on Bob.
We'll know for sure, in time.
See, taking a deep breath and ignoring "the Kelby" is taking affect, good.
But I think it would be wise for serious Photographers to come to grips with the possibility that Lightroom 7 will never come.
And that just occurred to you? There are a million scenario's where LR7 never comes or for that matter, San Jose and the Adobe staff will all be killed by a meteor. Breath, breath.
-
Let me add Bob, if such a time LR6 goes subscription or even LR7 and you want to affect change, start an online petition, get say 20,000 Adobe customers to sign it (I'd be happy to do so) and send to Adobe. Maybe Kelby will help market it?
-
Let me add Bob, if such a time LR6 goes subscription or even LR7 and you want to affect change, start an online petition, get say 20,000 Adobe customers to sign it (I'd be happy to do so) and send to Adobe. Maybe Kelby will help market it?
Why don't get a cold beer, chill out and come back to this later in the week?
-
And I'll not rant about what they may do in the future.
are there any rules against ranting about what Adobe may do in the future ? if no - then just move on... it seems that the "size" of Kelby's NDA is a subject of envy still :D
-
Why don't get a cold beer, chill out and come back to this later in the week?
I agree but was absolutely serious about an online petition and about signing it. It might be more effective than bitching individually. Adobe did back down to some degree when CC was announced in terms of pricing.
Lastly, let's not come back next week, let's stay in the forum and ask and answer questions about LR (any version). If folks want to rant or complain, there's a forum for that.
-
are there any rules against ranting about what Adobe may do in the future ? if no - then just move on... it seems that the "size" of Kelby's NDA is a subject of envy still :D
Rules no, but this isn't the forum to do so. We have one for that. This is specifically a forum for LR that folks are to ask and answer questions about the product, raw processing and printing. NOT Adobe's policies. Of which so far, few have provided.
-
I found that the only 'buy' price was the full price for those who don't already have LR 5. Then, I clicked on the down arrow and there is an update price that is about 1/2 the full price. But.... despite clicking on the update price several times and authorizing the changes to my order, it always went back to the full price.
So, it looks like I will staying with Lightroom 5.x for a while until they figure this one out. Or I figure it out. ;)
-
It took me 2 minutes to find the "stand-alone" version on the Adobe website and buying an "upgrade" license key was flawless at half the price of a full new version.
So I really don't see what all the fuss (and FUD) is all about.
-
Thanks. I will try again.
While Adobe does not emphasize the stand-alone version, it is there. I am not sure why my attempt to buy it at the update price failed, but I will try again.
-
Went to adobe.com. Two mouse clicks later I found LR6 offered for sale as a standalone app. What do you want for user-friendly? A cup of warm milk and a pat on the back?
Yes ... but we all have to admit it is a pure scavenger hunt on the Adobe site for a visitor to find Lr 6 perpetual license version on their own. Not to mention you have to interpret the purchase settings to seek out an upgrade purchase vs full version. The whole procedure as offered is not very user friendly. It is quite reasonable to think that by such placement and situation, Adobe is trying to make such purchases as difficult as possible and would prefer to see a quick end to the perpetual license offering.
Thinking that a subscription only situation for Lr will arrive sooner, rather than later is not an outlandish conclusion based upon this evidence ... even though Adobe has not publicly stated as much.
As we can recall ... there was no indication that CS perpetual licensing would end prior to the announcement of CC only in 2013. To be confident that Lr will be offered in a perpetual license indefinitely may just be wishful thinking.
-
It took me 2 minutes to find the "stand-alone" version on the Adobe website and buying an "upgrade" license key was flawless at half the price of a full new version.
So I really don't see what all the fuss (and FUD) is all about.
Please provide a link.
-
Adobe's German site was screwy, it didn't show any availability of Lightroom 6, only Lightroom CC. Only when I used their search function, did I (finally!) find LR6 and was able to download it.
Adobe - if you're so fixated with subscriptions, then don't offer standalone versions at all. If you do offer both, then quit playing games and trying to anger LR6 customers into subscribing to CC out of frustration. That seems your tactic. I like LR and I like PS CS6. But I'm not going to subscribe to anything!
-
Went to adobe.com. Two mouse clicks later I found LR6 offered for sale as a standalone app. What do you want for user-friendly? A cup of warm milk and a pat on the back?
Perhaps we mere mortals are not worthy ... please forgive my ineptitude ... i bow to your superior intellect and level of sophistication ... ;D
If you indeed accomplished the task in two clicks, it is you that deserves some milk ... and a cookies as well.
-
Went to adobe.com. Two mouse clicks later I found LR6 offered for sale as a standalone app. What do you want for user-friendly? A cup of warm milk and a pat on the back?
It seems that people of different nationality are treated differently by Adobe.com.
Perhaps spare the condescending tone until you have all the facts.
-
In fact, I tried downloading the "desktop only version" and got confusing dialogs, asking me to select a program on my harddisk, instead of downloading an installer for the program (LR6) I already selected. I'm not going to risk ruining my current LR5 setup if/when I decide to remove LR6 or not purchase a licence, so I declined to play along on their terms (and my risk/cost).
The same thing happened with me. Instead of downloading LR, the website launched CC installer. I actually persevered and let it do its thing. It first updated few other things than finally (after 15 minute) gave me a list of software I could download. I selected Lightroom and it started download. After about 20 minutes, it gave me a dialog that LR5 is running and needs to be closed.
What? In all previous versions of LR, old and new can subsist in parallel. If CC installer needed me to close LR5, it means it was going to overwrite some shared files. There is no telling what would happen when I uninstall LR CC. Thanks, but no thanks.
This is why I started this thread. If the pain of migration is inevitable, I would much rather do it now then next year.
-
What? In all previous versions of LR, old and new can subsist in parallel.
I don't believe that is true. I recall over the years, the catalog being updated with a new version, the older being left intact and, the catalogs had to be used with their respective version builds.
-
You are correct in your recollection, Andrew.
-
It took me 2 minutes to find the "stand-alone" version on the Adobe website and buying an "upgrade" license key was flawless at half the price of a full new version.
So I really don't see what all the fuss (and FUD) is all about.
People are paranoid that Adobe will switch LR to subscription, and are avidly hunting for every possible hint that Evil Adobe will foist subscription licensing on their customers.
-
Perhaps we mere mortals are not worthy ... please forgive my ineptitude ... i bow to your superior intellect and level of sophistication ... ;D
If you indeed accomplished the task in two clicks, it is you that deserves some milk ... and a cookies as well.
I think part of the issue here is that your experience on the Adobe.com web site depends a lot on your 'user state'. I am a CC Complete subscriber, and if I'm logged in to my Adobe ID, I don't see the fairly prominent LR6 Standalone box on the main Lightroom page (lower right but not tiny at all). This is standard user experience policy -- i.e. don't show the user things that are probably not relevant to him, if you know who he is. Very common in modern UX design.
If I log out of my Adobe ID and re-load the web page as an anonymous user, the LR6 Standalone box appears. Now, Adobe doesn't know whether I have a CC subscription or not, and it shows me all my buying options. I discovered this difference a few months ago, and I now know to check my signed-in state if I want to know whether Adobe may be tailoring content for me or not.
Adobe also sells its products through different subsidiaries and even independent subcontractors in different parts of the world, so if you are logging on from, say, Timbuktu, and the Timbuktu web sales site wasn't properly coded prior to the LR 6 launch, you may not be seeing a LR6 standalone link, even though you were supposed to -- because the subcontractor made a coding mistake. Also very common in a complex multi-national commerce environment -- bugs like this get sorted out in the first few days after launch, typically.
I am one of those people who was able to find the LR6 standalone link easily on the main Lightroom page, and then quickly navigate the dropdown menus to find the upgrade price ($79). It did indeed take me less than a minute. (I may or may not get LR CC through my subscription; I've been on a perpetual version of LR5 up until now.) But I realize that there are various ways that a different user, hitting the Adobe web site in a different user state, might not see the same things I did.
In other words, everyone may be right!
-
People are paranoid that Adobe will switch LR to subscription, and are avidly hunting for every possible hint that Evil Adobe will foist subscription licensing on their customers.
Yeah, aren't people paranoid? It's not as if Adobe have done that with the rest of their Creative Suite products, is it? Er....
Specifically for LR, they have said "indefinitely".
-
Yeah, aren't people paranoid? It's not as if Adobe have done that with the rest of their Creative Suite products, is it? Er....
Specifically for LR, they have said "indefinitely".
Indeed, without exact limits:
indefinite (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/indefinite)
They can of course just call it Lightroom 2017 Professional and offer that only on subscription basis, while LR6 remains indefinitely indefinite.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I think part of the issue here is that your experience on the Adobe.com web site depends a lot on your 'user state'.
That seems to be the case. I visited adobe.com using another browser from which I have never logged in to my Adobe account and it was much easier to find Lr6 vs Lr CC. If I use my normal browser and am already logged into my Adobe account, it is far more difficult to get there.
Which is perplexing because I have both a Photography CC Package license as well as a Perpetual license for Lr (using the same Adobe ID) ... it seems they wish me to avoid the latter.
-
Most likely is that they simply will stop updating the stand alone version, or leave out certain new and very desirable features.
But, this has been mentioned many times before, hasn't it.
-
Yeah, aren't people paranoid?
When they are hunting for every possible tiny clue to confirm their terror-stricken belief that one day, Adobe will change the licensing model for a piece of software OMG NOOOO!!! then yeah, they're a bit paranoid.
Or, to put it another way: Apple didn't make subtle changes to its website, or its purchasing process, before it dropped support for Aperture. They basically said "hi folks, in 6 months you're screwed."
If they are going to change the licensing, they'll change it. Reading tea leaves will not give you any additional advance notice.
And if it does change... so what? The sky will not fall, the earth will not open up and swallow your catalogs whole. It'll be fine.
-
Which is perplexing because I have both a Photography CC Package license as well as a Perpetual license for Lr (using the same Adobe ID) ... it seems they wish me to avoid the latter.
I also have the Photography CC package and perpetual license for Lr. When I went to install Lr6 upgrade yesterday, Lr told me I needed to enter my Adobe username, etc., which I did, and voila I now see via the Creative Cloud app that I have Lr CC(2015) rather than Lr6 installed. So I probably wasted $80.
David
-
@mousecop
Those who don't like subscription software have solid evidence that Adobe might suddenly switch entirely to that model. But yes, there is a kind of hysteria too.
But don't you say anything nasty about Apple. Screwed? Come on, Apple just gave the world Photos.... ;)
-
So I probably wasted $80.
Not really ... because you have two licenses, you can install the software on more computers. For example I have two desktop computers and two laptops. With two licenses, I have Lr available for use instantly on all four machines, no de-authorizing, re-authoriszing steps, I'm up and running on whichever workstation I choose to employ ...
Also, by having dual licensing, if I should ever decide to drop my CC subscription, I still have an active perpetual license to fall back on.
-
Not really ... because you have two licenses, you can install the software on more computers.
and if you buy a dozen licenses you can install on 24 computer. Won't that be cool!
This is what this thread is about. The Lightroom CC/6 separation is mixed up. If you make you already paying customer pay again (as happened with David) it tells you how mixed up things are.
In a few months time, Adobe will announce that having both subscription and stand-alone versions of Lightroom is causing confusion among customers, so they are forced to drop the paid version in the interest of customers.
-
I also have the Photography CC package and perpetual license for Lr. When I went to install Lr6 upgrade yesterday, Lr told me I needed to enter my Adobe username, etc., which I did, and voila I now see via the Creative Cloud app that I have Lr CC(2015) rather than Lr6 installed. So I probably wasted $80.
David
I did the same thing. I posted a question on LR Journal which was answered by Jeff Tranberry. If you try install your LR6 upgrade on an account which has an active subscription which includes LR, it will default to a LR CC installation, giving you no chance to enter your serial number. Others have successfully tried opening a second account and then buying and installing LR 6 on that account, but Jeff said I would have to quit my CC membership in order to use LR6.
I have asked for a refund, and may try later with a second account. But now I wonder if LR6 will give me the freedom from internet connection of previous versions. It seems that LR6 requires you to remain signed into your Adobe account -- not sure if the activation is a one time thing, or if it will require frequent check ins with the mothership.
-
This is what this thread is about. The Lightroom CC/6 separation is mixed up. If you make you already paying customer pay again (as happened with David) it tells you how mixed up things are.
The mixup is caused to some degree by people who rush to get their shiny new copy of LR6 without RTFM:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/serialize-lightroom-cc-trial-to-activate-as-lightroom-6.html
Or did Adobe have some hidden gun pointing to our heads demanding we hit the Pay button after being forced to enter our credit cards?
-
The mixup is caused to some degree by people who rush to get their shiny new copy of LR6 without RTFM:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/serialize-lightroom-cc-trial-to-activate-as-lightroom-6.html
Or did Adobe have some hidden gun pointing to our heads demanding we hit the Pay button after being forced to enter our credit cards?
In this day and age, there are no manuals. If your website requires a manual, it belongs to the age of dinosaurs. How many other websites do you recall which require you to read a manual or call neighbor's kid to help you navigate?
And the funny thing is that you will requires a manual to find the manual that you linked to.
-
The mixup is caused to some degree by people who rush to get their shiny new copy of LR6 without RTFM:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/serialize-lightroom-cc-trial-to-activate-as-lightroom-6.html
Or did Adobe have some hidden gun pointing to our heads demanding we hit the Pay button after being forced to enter our credit cards?
No guns, but they did offer a perpetual license version that you can't install using an account that has a (LR included) CC subscription associated with it -- that was a surprise. I finally got this sorted out with Jeff Tranberry. When I update my laptop I'll create another Adobe ID, buy the LR6 upgrade and install under that account. It turns out that LR6 only needs a one time activation, so no worries on the laptop. LR6 is not a dead end for me.
-
In this day and age, there are no manuals.
And people who don't follow instructions, manual or otherwise, impulsively and quickly click on buttons, enter credit cards and so forth get what they get.
How many other websites do you recall which require you to read a manual or call neighbor's kid to help you navigate?
I have no idea how many people have downloaded, purchased, upgraded LR6 in the last 36 hours but it's pretty clear, while some have had issues, the majority have not (myself included). There are at least hundreds of posts on various forums from people who have done so!
But let's not take any responsibility for this, it's all Adobe's fault.
-
It took me 2 minutes to find the "stand-alone" version on the Adobe website and buying an "upgrade" license key was flawless at half the price of a full new version.
So I really don't see what all the fuss (and FUD) is all about.
Well, the "standalone" installer also installs Adobe Application Manager, which is a hot mess. And, once I ran that, it downloaded Adobe Creative Cloud! I'm not kidding; I now have crap-ware all over my system.
This may be because I was a CC member until a couple days ago, so some back-end checking is going on and Adobe is forcing me to get Photoshop CC because I have a CC membership that hasn't expired yet. But I downloaded the "standalone" app and now I have anything but that on my system.
-
The mixup is caused to some degree by people who rush to get their shiny new copy of LR6 without RTFM:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/serialize-lightroom-cc-trial-to-activate-as-lightroom-6.html
Or did Adobe have some hidden gun pointing to our heads demanding we hit the Pay button after being forced to enter our credit cards?
A HA! That was the missing link. Thanks for that, Andrew.
As for the "RTFM", I think that's pretty cheap. Not even the Adobe help people understand this. I do NOT want all the extra stuff installed. I was running Lightroom 5 for 2 years as a CC paying member; I had not installed Photoshop at all (because I didn't want all the CC stuff, and LR had enough adjustments for me). I had no issues downloading LR5 standalone (it's just a single app), and putting it in my /Applications folder, and using the serial number that was auto-granted the first time I signed in to CC (which I then uninstalled).
But LR 6 is TOTALLY DIFFERENT. Even the "standalone installer" forces you to sign in, and then notices you're a CC subscriber and COMPLETELY changes the package it gives you. This is just bizarro: You download one thing, then Adobe is like "Wait, we forced him to sign in, and the sign-in he used is a CC one so he must want something else and BAM, here goes 1 GB of goodies he must want!" Well, no, it's not what I want, but because I deactivated CC but I'm paid through April 30th there was nothing I could do but use an older Adobe login (that I'd forgotten about) so I could serialize the product.
Very strange. I may be an edge case but dumb I'm not, and "RTFM" doesn't really begin to help because this stuff is BURIED in the help.
-
First off, I don't think I'm paranoid. Having said that, I may be forgetting things.
Secondly, I have never used Photoshop (CC), never will, and have no reason to enter into a subscription. I'm fine with the stand-alone version.
But on all the previous versions (I stared with V-1 and updated to each version), I seem to recall being able to log into Adobe, and DL a TRIAL version of the newest LR - without having to buy it. And then I was able to use it for a 30 day trial. Each time, I did the upgrade and registered it.
But I can't seem to find this option - all I find is an offer to buy it outright (or update from LR5).
So there seems to be a slightly perceptible change in the approach Adobe is taking?
Glenn
-
Really, really folks, I was told that Big Brother was going to be the Government. Instead I find that it's Adobe, Comcast, Google etc. Adobe's Website kept leading me towards the CC version. After numerous shifts of HTML pages and paying, downloading and certifying ID with Adobe, I open my copy to find I have agreed to send them information as to my usage unless I go back to my account and turn app management off. Also gratis I have a cloud subscription for 30 days for all my collections, unless I don't want it. But how could I be so crass as to not want it? They really want to push their electronic fingers into my computer and my photographic life and personal computer life. How nice of them.
All I want to do is make photographs and print them. And I don't need nor want Adobe for more than that. My final thought for you to consider is that profit maximization is alive and well. But my purse and my privacy are not doing so well.
-
... it's pretty clear, while some have had issues, the majority have not (myself included). There are at least hundreds of posts on various forums from people who have done so!
Using internet buzz as an indicator of customer satisfaction is error-prone (e.g. you tend to get unproportional amount of polarized opinions).
But let's not take any responsibility for this, it's all Adobe's fault.
I think that Adobe does some strange and annoying things in this area. Almost feels like some top management have their bonuses connected to the number of CC subscribers (as opposed to company profitability directly). But it is not the end the of the world. Worst case, someone else will offer the tools that Adobe will not supply us with. If that breaks the semi-monopoly in image editing, all the better for us customers. More realistically, Adobe (and their shareholders) will react if they see profits declining and believe that changing policies will improve profits.
-h
-
I looked all over on Adobe site and had to post here asking where to find the LR6(non-cc) and someone provided a link. DXO maybe a good alternate.
AfterShot I thought would be a potential future player, but not sure if they did anything after v1 which had issues for me.
C1, and ACDSee has a pro version with raw processing.
I see your point, it looks like they are weeding out and sifting as many as they can to switch to Cc, and maybe a matter of time 7, 8...9, 10? before they cut it loose.
-
I have now moved onto DxO...no more Adobe CC for me.
-
Went to adobe.com. Two mouse clicks later I found LR6 offered for sale as a standalone app. What do you want for user-friendly? A cup of warm milk and a pat on the back?
Haters will be haters...that's all.
-
Yeah, aren't people paranoid? It's not as if Adobe have done that with the rest of their Creative Suite products, is it? Er....
Specifically for LR, they have said "indefinitely".
Ok...so Apple totally bailed out. Corel turtled. You roll your dice and take them chances. So far Adobe brought us into this digital world and keeps pushing along. I'd rather hang my hat onto the one that brought me here for the last 15 years than some newby trying to bite the ankles of Adobe. If not Adobe...then look for the ankle biter of the day. Just STOP all this whining...move on.
-
I've been puzzled by the small step that LR cc/6 represents over LR 5 after around 2 years. I suppose that it is just a mature product and there is not much more they can do for the photographer.
They do say that cc subscribers will get feature updates, whereas 6 users will get only bug fixes. So maybe they held back features for the next quarterly release.
What new features could they offer? For me, I don't need features as such, but more speed / responsiveness and even better raw processing. In the latter case, there are diminishing returns. The best raw processor for a particular picture is not going to be that much better. And Adobe clearly prioritise simplicity of use over ultimate control (check out the number of sliders that Iridient developer offers).
Having their own cloud offering also seems to make Adobe slower with integration with a wider range of social media. Yes, there are plugins, but it's all a bit clunky.
Anyway. Enough yak. On with picture creation.
-
Really, really folks, I was told that Big Brother was going to be the Government. Instead I find that it's Adobe, Comcast, Google etc.
Whilst there are limitations on what government can do to "snoop" on you, there are vastly less restrictions on getting said information from companies (when asked) and various companies have proven to be very accommodating in the hope of getting juicy government contracts/purchases later.
-
So maybe they held back features for the next quarterly release.
That's been true of Adobe since nearly day one (I've been a beta since version 2.5). Adobe, probably any software company can't implement all the features at once, they are always working on new improvements. I suspect Adobe has a pretty good idea of what LR7, or whatever it may be called will provide along with new features they hope to roll into LR6CC until then and are working in parallel to do so. People may read into this as Adobe's attempt to lure you in with a subscription, so be it. But this isn't anything new in terms of software development.
-
I don't understand your point. I said "held back features" not "did not release features that were not ready".
They seems to have devoted a lot of effort in getting the CC version plumbed into their cloud, but those are features that benefit them more than they benefit the users. Even then, their plumbing was hardly Apple-seamless. At least two logs in and out of your id were required to get to the new Lightroom, without any prompt to do so. A poor user experience.
-
I don't understand your point. I said "held back features" not "did not release features that were not ready".
Held back implies something malicious and I don't subscribe to such speculations.
-
Tactical, not necessarily malicious.
-
Tactical, not necessarily malicious.
Again, whatever you wish to call it, I don't subscribe to such speculations.
-
... People may read into this as Adobe's attempt to lure you in with a subscription, so be it. But this isn't anything new in terms of software development.
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.
The fact that Adobe wants to make money more than they want to save the world is nothing remarkable, though.
-h
-
Geez folks, Adobe isn't nefarious. They may not run their company to exactly fit your desires but they aren't out to ruin your day either.
When they launched CC they said it served two main purposes.
1) from a corporate standpoint it smoothes out revenue.
2) it allows them to release updates and bug fixes more frequently and quite likely at a lower cost than the previous release cycles
Adobe has also said that they have NO intention of doing away with perpetual licensing for Lr. That makes good business sense. If you think of Lr as a gateway product for some photographers to CC why would they kill that by eliminating the perpetual license?
If you don't want or need CC then stick with the perpetual license. Its just that simple.
Will this hold true forever and ever? Nothing is forever except taxes. :)
What will the future hold? Who knows that answer for sure? I'm think that life for many, including Adobe, would be easier if we all had blazing fast internet connections and all their products could run on their servers. I'm pretty sure this is how Google, Apple and Microsoft see things.
-
What will the future hold? Who knows that answer for sure? I'm think that life for many, including Adobe, would be easier if we all had blazing fast internet connections and all their products could run on their servers. I'm pretty sure this is how Google, Apple and Microsoft see things.
If you want to completely render visual elements on a server based on control input (e.g. a users mouse moving a slider), you need really low network latency in order to make it not feel "sluggish". Now, certain "heavy" operations may take on the order of seconds or 10s of seconds (noise reduction, HDR, panorama,...) and for those it might make sense to do the processing centralized, especially if copies of the image data is allready kept at the server. If you need a peak processing power of X in order to do your thing, but only use the hardware 1 hour a day, then it can make sense to put similar hardware in a rack and rent it to a number of users. Is this not similar to what Erlang Units describe?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(unit)
I have a hard time seeing professionals and enthusiasts accepting that all of their images are located at some Adobe server, that all processing is done at their servers and that their local application is merely a webapp controlling things. For consumers, I think that this is inevitable, and perhaps even a good thing.
But who am I to predict things. I never thought that laptops would overtake stationary computers for general use, and I never saw the point of the tablet...
-h
-
Again, whatever you wish to call it, I don't subscribe to such speculations.
Andrew,
I'm not sure if the pun was intended, but you are funny (and yes, even though it's not my native tongue, I do understand the multiple meanings of 'subscribing to something' in the English language).
I also do not subscribe if I can avoid it, but that's another subject ...
Cheers,
Bart
-
Andrew,
I'm not sure if the pun was intended, but you are funny (and yes, even though it's not my native tongue, I do understand the multiple meanings of 'subscribing to something' in the English language).
I also do not subscribe if I can avoid it, but that's another subject ...
Cheers,
Bart
+1! :D
-
I also do not subscribe if I can avoid it, but that's another subject ...
You don't subscribe to anything?
I'd find that rather difficult.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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
-
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?
-
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...
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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' ?
-
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.
-
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.
-
Really? Six years later? Really?
Ya gotta be kidding...I think you answered your own question...that's unreasonable-a totally unreasonable expectation.
It is unreasonable to expect Adobe to keep supporting software for for six years or ten, but that is exactly the point of purchasing the software. Since I purchased LR 5, I can keep using it for as long as I wish. With the advent of virtual machines, I should still be able to run LR 5 on Windows 7 in 2020.
If I wanted to keep running subscription software, I will need to be paying $10/month until 2020 to Adobe to be able to use it. Yes, it will be newer version with support for newer cameras, but I could use the mfr provided software to convert RAW to JPG, DNG, or Tiff.
-
Yes, it will be newer version with support for newer cameras, but I could use the mfr provided software to convert RAW to JPG, DNG, or Tiff.
Presumably the new software will provide new functionality and features you find useful, if not, the subscription model is destined to fail.
-
Presumably the new software will provide new functionality and features you find useful, if not, the subscription model is destined to fail.
Absolutely. If the new features attract me, I will be all over it. However an upgrade 2/3 years with something that I want is different from paying monthly in the hope that there will be something I may want.
Selling software as a service is not a long-term viable model. Selling service as a service, and bundling software with it, is a viable model. This is what Microsoft is doing and is apparently being successful.
-
However an upgrade 2/3 years with something that I want is different from paying monthly in the hope that there will be something I may want.
What I'm hoping we see, and to some small degree we've seen it with Photoshop/ACR are new features on a somewhat regular basis, instead of waiting 18 months or two years. I think for the subscription plan to work, we need to see this. I'd hope we'd see this more with LR as it's audience is more focused than Photoshop. I recognize PS's customers do want 3D functionality for example, but those features have zero use for me. With LR, the team has to provide useful features on a regular basis (2-3 times a year?) for the core audience (Photographers) or it will fail to work under subscription IMHO.
-
With LR, the team has to provide useful features on a regular basis (2-3 times a year?) for the core audience (Photographers) or it will fail to work under subscription IMHO.
This is a concern of mine as well. While I don't lose sleep over it, I do wonder how soon and to what level complacency will set in for Adobe.
While I have zero doubts that those folks on the Lr team are more than capable of creating viable solutions we haven't even pondered yet, I am not as confident that the executives and accountants who make fiduciary decisions will give the team the resources and timetable to offer us what we have become accustomed to.
Once CC has reached the point of saturation where the number of subscriptions no longer show growth, it won't take long for the bean counters to realize, that revenues, and therefore profits will not increase no matter how many (or how few) new features or enhancements are added to Lr. Or how timely those items are released.
This was one of the great virtues of a perpetual license, it forces a developer to offer something worthy enough to generate a desired income in a timely fashion. In the absence of a direct competitor, there is little incentive to push the envelope when one has a more or less captive audience.
-
Presumably the new software will provide new functionality and features you find useful, if not, the subscription model is destined to fail.
Photoshop reached the point of 'nothing new worth paying for' at CS4 for me, Lightroom is already getting close to being feature complete too.
-
This is a concern of mine as well. While I don't lose sleep over it, I do wonder how soon and to what level complacency will set in for Adobe.
While I have zero doubts that those folks on the Lr team are more than capable of creating viable solutions we haven't even pondered yet, I am not as confident that the executives and accountants who make fiduciary decisions will give the team the resources and timetable to offer us what we have become accustomed to.
Once CC has reached the point of saturation where the number of subscriptions no longer show growth, it won't take long for the bean counters to realize, that revenues, and therefore profits will not increase no matter how many (or how few) new features or enhancements are added to Lr. Or how timely those items are released.
This was one of the great virtues of a perpetual license, it forces a developer to offer something worthy enough to generate a desired income in a timely fashion. In the absence of a direct competitor, there is little incentive to push the envelope when one has a more or less captive audience.
+1 (x 1000)
Cheers,
Bart
-
This is a concern of mine as well. While I don't lose sleep over it, I do wonder how soon and to what level complacency will set in for Adobe.
While I have zero doubts that those folks on the Lr team are more than capable of creating viable solutions we haven't even pondered yet, I am not as confident that the executives and accountants who make fiduciary decisions will give the team the resources and timetable to offer us what we have become accustomed to.
Once CC has reached the point of saturation where the number of subscriptions no longer show growth, it won't take long for the bean counters to realize, that revenues, and therefore profits will not increase no matter how many (or how few) new features or enhancements are added to Lr. Or how timely those items are released.
This was one of the great virtues of a perpetual license, it forces a developer to offer something worthy enough to generate a desired income in a timely fashion. In the absence of a direct competitor, there is little incentive to push the envelope when one has a more or less captive audience.
Well said, I couldn't agree more!
-
This is a concern of mine as well. While I don't lose sleep over it, I do wonder how soon and to what level complacency will set in for Adobe.
While I have zero doubts that those folks on the Lr team are more than capable of creating viable solutions we haven't even pondered yet, I am not as confident that the executives and accountants who make fiduciary decisions will give the team the resources and timetable to offer us what we have become accustomed to.
Once CC has reached the point of saturation where the number of subscriptions no longer show growth, it won't take long for the bean counters to realize, that revenues, and therefore profits will not increase no matter how many (or how few) new features or enhancements are added to Lr. Or how timely those items are released.
This was one of the great virtues of a perpetual license, it forces a developer to offer something worthy enough to generate a desired income in a timely fashion. In the absence of a direct competitor, there is little incentive to push the envelope when one has a more or less captive audience.
Don't know when that day will come where the subscription rate reaches saturation...but the digital camera boom has increased the potential customer base by at least 10 times. Countries like India and China have huge markets that are just entering into Adobe's markets.
I think we can sleep quite soundly for years to come not having to worry about Adobe's customer base being saturated.
-
Don't know when that day will come where the subscription rate reaches saturation...but the digital camera boom has increased the potential customer base by at least 10 times. Countries like India and China have huge markets that are just entering into Adobe's markets.
I think we can sleep quite soundly for years to come not having to worry about Adobe's customer base being saturated.
I hope you're right for everyone involved ... however, if you take a peek at Canon and Nikon DSLR sales of late ... even in the Asian/Eurasian market ... sales have more or less leveled off, they are actually seeing a small decline in some markets for the overall numbers they celebrated just a few years ago.
No matter how large of a pie you draw, all markets reach a saturation point. Whether that saturation is reached in a few years or a decade, matters little. The end results will in all likelihood be the same. Heck, two quarters ago Apple had their best quarter ever (to that point) but because they missed the Wall Street predictions by less than 2 percentage points, the headlines indicated they were a failure in the market's eyes with many pundits recommending selling off Apple stock.
No matter how you choose to view the future pie for Adobe, the pressure will be great to meet investor expectations ... and when it comes time to make cost cutting decisions ... it won't be the CEO's bonus that will face the axe first. If it were not for the fact that Adobe executives have set a precedent for making sweeping policy changes without prior notice ... I too, might be more inclined not to show much concern. Unfortunately, their track record in that area is not much of a confidence builder. I tend to reserve blind faith for other aspects of my life.
-
Don't know when that day will come where the subscription rate reaches saturation...but the digital camera boom has increased the potential customer base by at least 10 times. Countries like India and China have huge markets that are just entering into Adobe's markets.
I think we can sleep quite soundly for years to come not having to worry about Adobe's customer base being saturated.
The market may expand, but the players may change. Just look at the changes in computing over the last 10-20 years.
-
While I have zero doubts that those folks on the Lr team are more than capable of creating viable solutions we haven't even pondered yet, I am not as confident that the executives and accountants who make fiduciary decisions will give the team the resources and timetable to offer us what we have become accustomed to.
Once CC has reached the point of saturation where the number of subscriptions no longer show growth, it won't take long for the bean counters to realize, that revenues, and therefore profits will not increase no matter how many (or how few) new features or enhancements are added to Lr. Or how timely those items are released.
You dont need to go far in future to see this play out. Just look at the updates in LR6. Compare this with the feature requests in this forum and Adobe forums.
-
You dont need to go far in future to see this play out. Just look at the updates in LR6. Compare this with the feature requests in this forum and Adobe forums.
While I share the view that guaranteed revenues tend not to encourage progress, that's just twisting facts to suit. Not sure how one measures it, but Lr6 has about the same amount of progress as in previous releases, with two of the top items in Adobe's feature requests forum having been implemented.
-
I am not complaining, but it is evident that the dosage of new features is pretty well regulated, and I agree it was the same for LR 5.
With perpetual license, I have the option to not upgrade.
-
I hope you're right for everyone involved ... however, if you take a peek at Canon and Nikon DSLR sales of late ... even in the Asian/Eurasian market ... sales have more or less leveled off, they are actually seeing a small decline in some markets for the overall numbers they celebrated just a few years ago.
No matter how large of a pie you draw, all markets reach a saturation point. Whether that saturation is reached in a few years or a decade, matters little. The end results will in all likelihood be the same. Heck, two quarters ago Apple had their best quarter ever (to that point) but because they missed the Wall Street predictions by less than 2 percentage points, the headlines indicated they were a failure in the market's eyes with many pundits recommending selling off Apple stock.
No matter how you choose to view the future pie for Adobe, the pressure will be great to meet investor expectations ... and when it comes time to make cost cutting decisions ... it won't be the CEO's bonus that will face the axe first. If it were not for the fact that Adobe executives have set a precedent for making sweeping policy changes without prior notice ... I too, might be more inclined not to show much concern. Unfortunately, their track record in that area is not much of a confidence builder. I tend to reserve blind faith for other aspects of my life.
Butch, I'm not going into this with blind faith...but in the big world of things...this $10/month that I pay is peanuts...not worth my time or energy to worry about what might happen in the future. If Adobe decides to charge $50/month tomorrow, I'll just move to another product. To waste my time and energy running around like chicken little...well I just have much more important things to worry about in my life.
-
I am not complaining, but it is evident that the dosage of new features is pretty well regulated, and I agree it was the same for LR 5.
With perpetual license, I have the option to not upgrade.
Well you also have options here.
1. Subscribe and get the latest greatest.
2. Stay with the perpetual license...at least for now.
3. Look for other product options.
Very simple as far as I can see. Expending time and energy on the perpetual versus subscription options just seems like a waste of time.
-
Whatever you decide now, it's scarcely a lifetime decision (barring an unexpected accident ;D )
You can opt for CC for a year or two. See how it pans out in functionality and stability (stability, because in my experience more frequent functional releases don't help), or maybe Mobile becomes really useful to you. If it doesn't work out, rebuy/upgrade standalone (assuming it still exists!).
Simple?
Dave
-
To waste my time and energy running around like chicken little...well I just have much more important things to worry about in my life.
Expending time and energy on the perpetual versus subscription options just seems like a waste of time.
Bravo chez! ... You never cease to amaze me with your contributions here and elsewhere. You have become a unique source of amusement when you make such comments.
Surely, you are not so obtuse that the shear hypocrisy and contradiction these two statements represent?
I can only assume you make such comments as a satirical jest. Thanks ... you made my morning :D
-
Bravo chez! ... You never cease to amaze me with your contributions here and elsewhere. You have become a unique source of amusement when you make such comments.
Surely, you are not so obtuse that the shear hypocrisy and contradiction these two statements represent?
I can only assume you make such comments as a satirical jest. Thanks ... you made my morning :D
Butch, glad I can help,,,but I'm dead serious. Subscription has been out for quite a time now. It's been rehashed plenty, yet the same crew keep their complaints coming. I'm just thinking that maybe it's time to stop the complaints and maybe move onto other products.
This whole conspiracy that Adobe once they get people locked into subscription they'll just sit on their laurels and raise the price is what makes me chuckle in the morning over coffee.
-
Butch, glad I can help,,,but I'm dead serious.
Please, stop ... you're killing me ;D
If you truly believe in what you profess, you would not invest so much of your valuable time and effort on these topics you consider a "waste of time" ...
If so ... why is it my view is a waste of time ... and your view is not? You seriously don't recognize the contradiction?
-
Please, stop ... you're killing me ;D
If you truly believe in what you profess, you would not invest so much of your valuable time and effort on these topics you consider a "waste of time" ...
If so ... why is it my view is a waste of time ... and your view is not? You seriously don't recognize the contradiction?
Actually Butch I come into this thread hoping to get other views on the topic but all I get is the same dribble that has been layer out previously.
You are right...this is a waste of my time.
-
Well you also have options here.
1. Subscribe and get the latest greatest.
2. Stay with the perpetual license...at least for now.
3. Look for other product options.
Very simple as far as I can see. Expending time and energy on the perpetual versus subscription options just seems like a waste of time.
Already at it. #2 and #3 are my choices. Staying with LR5 for asset management, and using C1 for processing.
-
I don't know how others who are following this discussion may feel, but my impression is that this thread has reached a dead end. Or if not a dead end, perhaps an infinite loop.
-
I don't know how others who are following this discussion may feel, but my impression is that this thread has reached a dead end. Or if not a dead end, perhaps an infinite loop.
The latter. Without a shadow of a doubt, the latter.
Jeremy
-
I don't know how others who are following this discussion may feel, but my impression is that this thread has reached a dead end. Or if not a dead end, perhaps an infinite loop.
+∞.
-
+∞.
If there is nothing to be said, then dont say it. Posting upvotes that the thread is finished is sure to keep the thread on top.