Sub Standard

[Chris Kern]

Adobe's migration some years back from a fixed license to a software-as-a-service (subscription) model never particularly bothered me, although I know it was a sore point for many photography customers (in particular, and probably more in the company's broader installed base) — and prompted some to move to other products.  But I suspect the company's latest financials make it clear there's no going back.  And I gather other software manufacturers may soon be following suit.

For quite a few years I licensed software for an agency of the U.S. Government and we always expected to pay annual fees in order to qualify for bug fixes and product upgrades.  They were usually referred to as "software maintenance" in those days, but they weren't conceptually much different from a consumer-grade subscription service.

Since I also managed a number of full-time programmers, it never struck me as odd that a software manufacturer would need to extract some sort of annuity payment to cover its recurring labor costs.  I never understood the economics of providing intra-release bug fixes without charge and only requiring payment for major updates.

[Jonathan Cross]

I am quite happy to pay the current monthly fee to Adobe for LR and PS.  Others may have a different view depending on personal circumstances.  I mainly use LR and the changes to masking definitely make it worthwhile in my view.  Innovation does not come free.

Jonathan

[Rhossydd]

Software as a service by subscription makes complete sense in a commercial environment. It's just difficult for non-commercial users to change their attitude about having to pay continuously for their software.
There was, and continues to be, a lot of concern that once committed to subscription, suppliers might sit back and take the money without continuing to innovate or steadily increase prices.

[Jonathan Cross]

There was, and continues to be, a lot of concern that once committed to subscription, suppliers might sit back and take the money without continuing to innovate or steadily increase prices.

Competition can work against such practices.

Jonathan

[Chris Kern]

There was, and continues to be, a lot of concern that once committed to subscription, suppliers might sit back and take the money without continuing to innovate or steadily increase prices.

Competition can work against such practices.

Agree.  And my impression is that Adobe has been adding new capabilities to Lightroom and Photoshop (I don't monitor the patches to its other products carefully) more frequently since it moved to a software-as-a-service model.

Of course, update frequency tends to correlate with the introduction of coding errors.  My principal complaint with Adobe is the company's lack of candor regarding known problems and the schedule for fixes, except, after the fact, for bugs which have been publicly reported by end-users.  I've never understood the marketing or economic justification for denying current customers access to validated bug reports and the intended schedule for fixing them.

Of course, Adobe is not alone in this cavalier attitude toward its customers.

[Rhossydd]

And my impression is that Adobe has been adding new capabilities to Lightroom and Photoshop (I don't monitor the patches to its other products carefully) more frequently since it moved to a software-as-a-service model.

I wouldn't agree with that.
Most of the additions to LR since 6 were pretty lightweight and insignificant for me until the AI masking arrived.
PS has changed, but I still haven't found anything new that's much use to me, and fair bit that's just confusing, so I still fire up CS4 for pixel editing.

[MattBurt]

I preferred the old license model but I understand why they wanted to move on from that. I work in software too and SAAS is very mainstream these days. Much more profitable for my employer than the previous model. But as the consumer I'm a bit less enthusiastic. Since I make money from my photos I see the subscription now as just a cost of ding business. If I was purely a hobbyist I'd be looking for other solutions.

[Jonathan Cross]

Since I make money from my photos I see the subscription now as just a cost of ding business. If I was purely a hobbyist I'd be looking for other solutions.

It all depends. I am a hobbyist, but do quite a lot for a couple of charities, and do not charge.  I do have occasional sales.  Adobe has priced its subscription at a level I can afford and am prepared to accept.  I have used LR since version 2. I look back at how I processed images in LR in the past and realise how much more I can do easily now, and so have reprocessed and reprinted some.  The changes to masking are really good for me.  I rarely use Photoshop, but, when I do, usually all I do is just click Edit in Photoshop, enlarge the canvas a little at the bottom and add a caption in a nice font and colour, save and I am taken back to LR with a revised separate image.  I use Canon's Print and Layout plug-in as I find it easier to use than the LR print module and I like the way it handles b&W printing one my Pro-300 printer.  It works easily from LR. 

For me I have a package that I am very comfortable with.  I do not want to have to learn a new system.  My only hope is that Adobe does not get greedy and up the subscription.  That would make me look at the competition.

Jonathan