PS/LR CC subscription: wonder what happens in 12 months?

[Justinr]

Seems like a question for John Hollenberg given that he apparently thought it worth "the upgrade from CS5 to CS6".

To my way of thinking Adobe took PS and made it an elitist product simply because they had no competition. Over the years there was very much the insinuation that if you can't afford a couple of thou every year on keeping up to date then you ain't really a proper photographer. PS is still the big daddy but thankfully there are now smaller fish nibbling at the edges and I'm inclined to see if it's possible to live without it on the PC.

[john beardsworth]

Yeah, it might even help keep photographers honest

[Justinr]

Quite.

Adobe told the world that proper photography was impossible without PS, and that will be 2K thank you very much.

Then they sat back and wondered why everybody (an awful lot anyway) was pirating the software!

[Ken Richmond]

The reason for Adobe's age requirement is legal.  Depending on the jurisdiction, ie. state, a person under 18 cannot contract for future performance.

Ken Richmond

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

The reason for Adobe's age requirement is legal.  Depending on the jurisdiction, ie. state, a person under 18 cannot contract for future performance.

Hi Ken,

I've been wondering about how specific one needs to be (and I realize it may differ by jurisdiction) to comply with local law. Does a simple statement that one declares to be over 18 suffice, or does one need to specify a date of birth. The latter also constitutes a privacy risk (as the recent hack with credit card details and passwords proves).

Cheers,
Bart

[John Hollenberg]

The reason for Adobe's age requirement is legal.  Depending on the jurisdiction, ie. state, a person under 18 cannot contract for future performance.

And the truth shall set you free!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jQP0Y2T2OQ

[Ken Richmond]

Bart,

Adobe can protect itself with an affirmation that, "I am legally competent to enter a contract for future performance.", but I think it would cause some consternation, so they do it by requiring one to indicate a birth date.  There's little likelihood that they undertake any effort to confirm the information.

Ken Richmond

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Bart,

Adobe can protect itself with an affirmation that, "I am legally competent to enter a contract for future performance.", but I think it would cause some consternation, so they do it by requiring one to indicate a birth date.  There's little likelihood that they undertake any effort to confirm the information.

Hi Ken,

Thanks for confirming what I sort of assumed.

Cheers,
Bart

[Jan K.]

Sorry, but if you lie about date of birth, Adobe may - according to license agreement - terminate your account... http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2013/20130508_1a-Adobe-legal-agreement.html

[John Hollenberg]

Sorry, but if you lie about date of birth, Adobe may - according to license agreement - terminate your account... http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2013/20130508_1a-Adobe-legal-agreement.html

It's a lot worse than I thought.  Looks like CS6 will be my final version of Photoshop... should save me considerable amount of money over the years.

[Farmer]

Why?  They need to confirm that you have the legal capacity to enter into a contract and for them to store certain information about you.  That's a pretty normal requirement.

[John Hollenberg]

Why?  They need to confirm that you have the legal capacity to enter into a contract and for them to store certain information about you.  That's a pretty normal requirement.

All they would need to do is ask if you are over 18 (or whatever age is required).  I doubt they have a way to check your date of birth, so this is just giving out private information they have no need for with potential for misuse.  Since Adobe has been hacked already, why would I want to give them information they don't need?

[chez]

It's a lot worse than I thought.  Looks like CS6 will be my final version of Photoshop... should save me considerable amount of money over the years.

Seems to me quite a petty reason to make a decision around. This forum actually asked you to fill in your age in your profile.

Maybe Adobe plans to send everyone a present on their birthdays.

[John Hollenberg]

Seems to me quite a petty reason to make a decision around. This forum actually asked you to fill in your age in your profile.

Well, one man's petty is another man's final straw.  As a hobbyist, I don't have a strong "need" to upgrade, although I do find some additional features (e.g., non-destructive crop in CS6) useful.  I don't really care to "rent" software or anything else anyway.  Since I was on the fence about whether to get Photoshop CC, it didn't take much of a push to keep me from signing up... and Adobe was ready.  If you read earlier in the thread, the problem wasn't so much the asking for my birthdate, it was locking me out for 24 hours for providing an unacceptable date.  If they can screw up something this simple, I don't trust them to have my rental software always available for me to use.

[Isaac]

If they can screw up something this simple, I don't trust them to have my rental software always available for me to use.

I've no quarrel with the choices you make, they're your choices to make; but as the "rental software" is installed locally on your computer, and the software license is only validated every 30 days, and you could continue to use the software for something between 30 and 90 days offline - I'm plain puzzled about the "don't trust them to have my rental software always available for me to use" hypothetical.

[John Hollenberg]

As the "rental software" is installed locally on your computer, and the software license is only validated every 30 days, and you could continue to use the software for something between 30 and 90 days offline - I'm plain puzzled about the "don't trust them to have my rental software always available for me to use" hypothetical.

Yes, that is what the current terms of use are... but I don't trust they will stay the same (nor do I trust the price won't increase significantly if they think they can wring more revenue from a higher monthly charge).  I don't see this as a road I want to start traveling down.  This is a way for Adobe to get a steady income without any guarantee that the improvements in the software will be of any benefit to me.  Apparently they don't think they can get enough people to upgrade with the perpetual software license model, given that Photoshop is a pretty mature product.

[chez]

Yes, that is what the current terms of use are... but I don't trust they will stay the same (nor do I trust the price won't increase significantly if they think they can wring more revenue from a higher monthly charge).  I don't see this as a road I want to start traveling down.  This is a way for Adobe to get a steady income without any guarantee that the improvements in the software will be of any benefit to me.  Apparently they don't think they can get enough people to upgrade with the perpetual software license model, given that Photoshop is a pretty mature product.

I guess time will tell all...but for $120 for the year, I am willing to see how things shake out with CC. I might be very pleasantly surprised and continue with the subscription or I might be dissapointed and stop the subscription. That is a small amount of cash to lay out to really try the product for yourself rather than listening to people's rants on the boards, mostly from people who have not subscribed and really don't know anything about CC.

[Isaac]

PS is still the big daddy but thankfully there are now smaller fish nibbling at the edges and I'm inclined to see if it's possible to live without it on the PC.

That, of course, very much depends on what you are trying to do -- I don't use PS, but these luminosity mask post processing techniques are all explained in terms of PS.

[MrSmith27]

The whole discussion on Adobe subscriptions seems completely idiotic to me:

1) It's a fantastic offer, even at $25/month. At $12/month it's literally a steal. Photoshop used to be around $1000 for a single license and then hundreds at least for updates. For beginners this was seriously too expensive. Now everybody can afford Photoshop. Everybody. $12/month is really cheap even if editing pictures is a hobby. We are literally talking the equivalent of 2 lattes, 2 beers or a single lunch here.

2) Nothing comes close to Photoshop. I have tried all the alternatives from commercial to Open Source and in the end they all suck. Sure, for some basic editing you probably can do this with Gimp. And if you are clever then probably even make it do some more advanced things. But nothing comes close to Photoshop. It's usability is better. It's features are better. The algos are better. It's literally super bowl vs. little league.

3) So $12/month for the best software in the world and people complain? The same people that happily drop $500 or even $5000 on some other gear? Insanity.

[john beardsworth]

If you actually read, you'll see people aren't questioning it on the basis of the cost (though there are plenty of doubts about what it will be in future). Good for you if you consider it OK for you, but don't deny others the right to take a different view.