Photoshop CC & Lightroom 5 for €9.99 per month...12 month contract.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I think i will wait for the 5$ offer

Absolutely, only available for those who never subscribed before ;-)

Cheers,
Bart

[jjj]

I think i will wait for the 5$ offer

I wonder if Adobe were to offer the entire CC for say $15, would anyone not subscribe?

[Doyle Yoder]

You don't get it.

$50.00 a month would be fine if they offered an end solution.

Until then the answer is NO!

[Rory]

You don't get it.

$50.00 a month would be fine if they offered an end solution.

Until then the answer is NO!

+1

[chez]

Not in Europe. We pay 37% more (based on todays exchange rate).

Maybe it's a cultural thing, but apparently paying customers (i.e. those who helped Adobe to become as profitable as they are and who used to get a special deal till Dec 31st), are no longer given a special treatment. It's sad that it needs explaining that that is insulting.

Anyway, they've made it easier for me to make my decision. I'll wait for a better deal.

Cheers,
Bart

I guess you'll feel insulted even more when you wait past Dec 31 and find the price has gone back to $19.99 per month and someone who had never owned PS will be paying $9.99 because they signed up in December.

Seems to me you would not have signed up regardless so offering a deal to new comers is just noise.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I guess you'll feel insulted even more when you wait past Dec 31 and find the price has gone back to $19.99 per month and someone who had never owned PS will be paying $9.99 because they signed up in December.

Wrong. I use Photoshop CS6 for almost all my edits (together with the TopazLabs plug-ins), but sofar CC doesn't offer enough new features that I cannot do with other applications to urge me into a bad deal.

Seems to me you would not have signed up regardless so offering a deal to new comers is just noise.

Wrong again, if I were not interested in a fair deal, I wouldn't bother to ask/wait for it.

Cheers,
Bart

[jrsforums]

Wrong again, if I were not interested in a fair deal, I wouldn't bother to ask/wait for it.

Cheers,
Bart

Hi, Bart...

I may have missed something in your earlier posts, but what do you consider a fair deal?

Current offering, to me seems fairly priced.  I don't like that I lose PS CC if I stop paying, but it is not the end of the world as I have finished output (TIFF PSD)....and I can still edit them, up to the capability of CS6.

LR, for now, stays available (not clear, to me, if I would need to buy latest license).  This is important as most work is not in a final form. 

If LR went rental only I would drop Adobe like a stone.

John

[chez]

Wrong. I use Photoshop CS6 for almost all my edits (together with the TopazLabs plug-ins), but sofar CC doesn't offer enough new features that I cannot do with other applications to urge me into a bad deal.

Cheers,
Bart

really. So you feel insulted today when someone who has never purchased PS can get the same deal as you, yet you would not feel insulted when you have to pay twice the price as someone who never purchased before. You sure about that? What about you paying three times the price...that make you feel even better. 

[jjj]

You don't get it.

$50.00 a month would be fine if they offered an end solution.

Until then the answer is NO!

That's a separate and much argued about issue.
I'm positing a lower price that would dramatically increase uptake, the same would apply to a non-subscription model.

[Simon Garrett]

You don't get it.

$50.00 a month would be fine if they offered an end solution.

Until then the answer is NO!

What sort of end solution do you mean?  Can you give examples of what you have in mind?

[jjj]

An end solution is one where you could still edit your work after ceasing to subscribe. No more updates obviously, but no being left high and dry either.
A software subscription is effectively payable until you die, if you wish to re-edit stuff.

[Rory]

What I find interesting is how my feelings toward a vendor affect my spending decisions.  I have upgraded every version of Photoshop since version 3 - all the way through to CS6.  I did not always need the upgrade but I wanted to stay on top of the technology and support a great product.  Somewhere around CS4 I started to become a little disenchanted with Adobe.  It seemed that bugs were not being resolved, especially in the Bridge program.  The quality control appeared to be less than it could be.  With the Adobe push of CC I have become more annoyed - to the point where I find it very difficult to spend $10 per month. 

So, how did Adobe manage to change my perspective about being willing to spend money?  I think it comes down to trust.  I trusted Adobe to be improving Photoshop for a long time, but their behavior over the last few years has eroded the trust.  Now they are saying "rent me and we promise to make it better".  Hmmm.

What Adobe has accomplished is to move an ardent supporter into someone that may buy their new products, but very reluctantly.  One who is looking for alternative solutions.  One who is advising others to be very careful about buying into the whole CC thing.  In the end I doubt I will opt for the $10 per month deal.  Not because of the money but as a matter of principle.

[Simon Garrett]

An end solution is one where you could still edit your work after ceasing to subscribe. No more updates obviously, but no being left high and dry either.
A software subscription is effectively payable until you die, if you wish to re-edit stuff.

I don't like the subscription model.  I've subscribed to the offer, but I'd rather just update PS every two or three, as I used to be able to do, and update LR every time.

However, I can't see any half-way house if Adobe stop perpetual licences.  I mean: renting software means that you can't use it if you don't pay the rent. 

What about a stand-alone package that would convert any layered etc PSD or TIF, and convert it to a flat TIF or JPEG - which could then be edited by pretty much any other editor?  Is that the sort of end solution we're talking about?  Or do we really mean we just don't want a rent-only model?  Frankly, that's what I'd prefer - a choice of rental of perpetual licence, with an option to update up to three versions ago, which is what we used to have. 

I trusted Adobe to be improving Photoshop for a long time, but their behavior over the last few years has eroded the trust.  Now they are saying "rent me and we promise to make it better".  Hmmm.

Yes, I agree with that.  The improvements from CS5->CS6->CC seem to have got smaller each time.  And once they've got people committed to pay anyway, what further incentive is there on Adobe to innovate?  Not much. 

[chez]

Yes, I agree with that.  The improvements from CS5->CS6->CC seem to have got smaller each time.  And once they've got people committed to pay anyway, what further incentive is there on Adobe to innovate?  Not much. 

Yes, but the CC model is going to be only small improvements but more frequent so the engineers don't have to wait for a big bundled release to get new functionality out. Once the functionality is ready, it is released without having to wait on other functionality to be ready for release. The CC model will be ever evolving. That's why I don't understand people comparing CS6 to CC. The CC releases will continue to occur over the following years, there is not just one CC release.

[Some Guy]

I find  it interesting that many of the plug-in software makers are now resorting to stand-alones where they used to be accessed only through Photoshop.  One hold-out was AlienSkin and I noticed their latest Snap 4 plugin is now a standalone.  OnOne has done much the same (PerfectPhoto Suite) as has Topaz (photoFXlab) with their own stand-alone software packs.  Plus, Corel has begun to implement former PS plugins into their PaintShop Pro X6 program as well - albeit with some issues.

Possibly they see the need to perpetuate their software for people who do not want to sign on for CC monthly payments, higher prices (future and now), and no perpetual license (i.e. vaporware) as a need for the stand-alones.

Personally, I wouldn't care if Adobe went bust or any other software maker either.  Ones who have non-perpetual licensed software might though.

SG

[Simon Garrett]

Yes, but the CC model is going to be only small improvements but more frequent so the engineers don't have to wait for a big bundled release to get new functionality out. Once the functionality is ready, it is released without having to wait on other functionality to be ready for release. The CC model will be ever evolving. That's why I don't understand people comparing CS6 to CC. The CC releases will continue to occur over the following years, there is not just one CC release.

Well, facts don't bear that out so far:

CS3   April 2007
CS4   Oct 2008 (18 months later)
CS5   April 2010 (18 months later)
CS6   May 2012 (25 months later - CS5.1 doesn't count as a release as it had virtually nothing in it for Photoshop)
CC   June 2013 (13 months later)

Allowing for CS5 being 7 months later than the regular pattern, it's been every 18 months.  The subscription model was started in May 2011.  

Are we to believe that from now on, 2 and a half years after the subscription model started, we'll get faster releases in future?
And I mean not just more frequent releases of fewer new features, but a faster rate of development?  

I don't think so!

And why on earth would they, when they've no financial incentive to do so?  It doesn't seem likely that they will increase their rate of development.  And I would argue that since CS4 the rate of innovation in Photoshop has already been falling, release by release (or year by year if you prefer).

[Isaac]

I mean: renting software means that you can't use it if you don't pay the rent.

Correct. 

What about a stand-alone package that would convert any layered etc PSD or TIF, and convert it to a flat TIF or JPEG

What prevents you from doing that export with PS CC?

Moving files backwards from Photoshop CC (Updated)

[Doyle Yoder]

With the numbers of sales between CS6 perpetual and CS6 subscription, they can not be thinking CC could possibly succeed.

The question is, what is Adobe up to?

Tanking stocks to buy back control?

May not be working as well as planed?

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1748712-insiders-are-selling-adobe-systems

Does this send a message?
 
We may know more by the middle of this month.

[Simon Garrett]

What about a stand-alone package that would convert any layered etc PSD or TIF, and convert it to a flat TIF or JPEG - which could then be edited by pretty much any other editor?  Is that the sort of end solution we're talking about?  Or do we really mean we just don't want a rent-only model?  Frankly, that's what I'd prefer - a choice of rental of perpetual licence, with an option to update up to three versions ago, which is what we used to have.

What prevents you from doing that export with PS CC?

People are talking about:

An end solution is one where you could still edit your work after ceasing to subscribe. No more updates obviously, but no being left high and dry either.

In other words, when you can no longer do that export from PS CC, because your subscription has run out, what about an "end solution" that allows you at least to convert your PS files to a form that other editors can read. 

Most editors can read tifs and jpegs, but not necessarily layered tifs, or PSD files. 

[jjj]

People are talking about:In other words, when you can no longer do that export from PS CC, because your subscription has run out, what about an "end solution" that allows you at least to convert your PS files to a form that other editors can read. 

Most editors can read tifs and jpegs, but not necessarily layered tifs, or PSD files. 

Layered PSD/TIFF files have to be saved in a specific way for even LR to display correctly. This 'maximise compatibility' method includes a flattened composite layer so programmes that cannot parse PS layers can correctly display the file. So if you set the maximise compatibility box in prefs to always, your files will always be usable [though not fully editable of PS specific features like adjustment layers/smart objects etc] by other software.