Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
That's not quite true is it?.- If it were, I would have waited till CS7 or CS8 before upgrading from CS5. As it is, I bought an upgrade to CS6 last week because as far as I know, it is to be the last version of Photoshop that I will ever be able to buy.

I'm sorry, should I have used the term "provide" instead of "sell"? It is true that Adobe wants to sell/rent/lease or in some other way provide software tools in exchange for money to the publishing, design, gfx, editing, etc., communities. The context of my statement was contrasting the end goal of Adobe to the much different end goals of companies such as MS, Apple, AT&T, Timewarner, etc.,.
 
Or save your money and look at alternatives.

There really isn't an alternative for Photoshop. Pixelmator, Acorn, and the Gimp only do so much. But now is the time for any enterprising developer to step up their game and make a great alternative...
 
There really isn't an alternative for Photoshop. Pixelmator, Acorn, and the Gimp only do so much. But now is the time for any enterprising developer to step up their game and make a great alternative...
I agree, but not everyone needs all the features that Photoshop has.
 
Pry tell, what alternatives are these? Do they stack up, or is it like saying open office is an alternative for ms office?
As it says above, it all depends on what you need to do. Some people get Photoshop because it is "The One To Get" and not because they need it. Some people never ever use more than a rather small fraction of the features in Photoshop.

And yes, for some people there may be nothing that can replace Photoshop for what they use it for.
 
That's not quite true is it?.- If it were, I would have waited till CS7 or CS8 before upgrading from CS5. As it is, I bought an upgrade to CS6 last week because as far as I know, it is to be the last version of Photoshop that I will ever be able to buy.

Adobe does not want us to buy their software anymore. They want to control our access to it by renting out the use of the software. That way, instead of the customer deciding which upgrades are worthwhile spending our money on. They get to continually take our money while providing whatever they see fit to provide. Withdrawing access to important tools, if for any reason we are unable to meet the rental payments.

You see, I'm not the 'professional creative industry', I'm a professional creative individual, who sometimes gets paid very late by the 'professional creative industry'. Which means I have a variable income. Which is why, when I have the money I replenish and update my tools. I expect them always at hand when I need them, not to have them snatched away due to unplanned dips in my income when I need them most.

This outrageous move by Adobe to restrict access to industry standard software, will hurt a great many artists and freelancers on variable income. It's nothing short of a contemptuous breach of trust with long time PS users.

I for the life of me cannot understand why and how people are missing that very, very important point.

I will not rent software no matter how cleverly marketed the companies efforts are.
 
That's not quite true is it?.- If it were, I would have waited till CS7 or CS8 before upgrading from CS5. As it is, I bought an upgrade to CS6 last week because as far as I know, it is to be the last version of Photoshop that I will ever be able to buy.

Adobe does not want us to buy their software anymore. They want to control our access to it by renting out the use of the software. That way, instead of the customer deciding which upgrades are worthwhile spending our money on. They get to continually take our money while providing whatever they see fit to provide. Withdrawing access to important tools, if for any reason we are unable to meet the rental payments.

You see, I'm not the 'professional creative industry', I'm a professional creative individual, who sometimes gets paid very late by the 'professional creative industry'. Which means I have a variable income. Which is why, when I have the money I replenish and update my tools. I expect them always at hand when I need them, not to have them snatched away due to unplanned dips in my income when I need them most.

This outrageous move by Adobe to restrict access to industry standard software, will hurt a great many artists and freelancers on variable income. It's nothing short of a contemptuous breach of trust with long time PS users.

I totally agree with this, and that Adobe is screwing a lot of people over. However, as a coping strategy, could you (while still on CS5 or CS6) set aside what you would have spent anyway on CS7 or CS8 -- in a separate account if necessary -- so that you can draw on that for the monthly fees in case of cash flow problems?
 
That's not quite true is it?.- If it were, I would have waited till CS7 or CS8 before upgrading from CS5. As it is, I bought an upgrade to CS6 last week because as far as I know, it is to be the last version of Photoshop that I will ever be able to buy.

Adobe does not want us to buy their software anymore. They want to control our access to it by renting out the use of the software. That way, instead of the customer deciding which upgrades are worthwhile spending our money on. They get to continually take our money while providing whatever they see fit to provide. Withdrawing access to important tools, if for any reason we are unable to meet the rental payments.

You see, I'm not the 'professional creative industry', I'm a professional creative individual, who sometimes gets paid very late by the 'professional creative industry'. Which means I have a variable income. Which is why, when I have the money I replenish and update my tools. I expect them always at hand when I need them, not to have them snatched away due to unplanned dips in my income when I need them most.

This outrageous move by Adobe to restrict access to industry standard software, will hurt a great many artists and freelancers on variable income. It's nothing short of a contemptuous breach of trust with long time PS users.
I subscribe to every word you say.
I haven't meet ANY independent self-employed creative professional colleague yet, who is willing to go CC! They all have updated to CS6 or are going to because they hate this new life-long subordination model with venom.
Even the old arch enemy QuarkXpress looks more promising to us now than Adobe...
 
Just in case this hasn't been posted, but here's a link for the Petition so please do sign!
https://www.change.org/petitions/ad...e-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model

—This rental model has a huge implication in the future if Adobe does succeed! Because more likely than not that other software companies will follow suit. Who the heck can afford more multiple monthly bills on top of what we already have!
—And you won't be able to access to any of your files if you stop your monthly payment in the forseeable future! A poster posed this point, what if I retire from the industry and still want access to my files, then in order to do that, one would have to continue coughing up cash?
—Adobe is not offering choices and options that best serve all customers. Not all customers need or want CC!

----------

And if Adobe doesn't listen to its customers concerns, I’d urge those who has CS6 to not jump over to CC model! But to not upgrade or switch to CC at all for at least 2 or 3 years and see how they like it!
—And during this time, one can plan to transition out of CS6 w/ other alternatives out there! Adobe may be the standard but there are other viable options!
—The root problem is when any company has a monopoly on anything is not a good deal for customers/users long term!
 
Last edited:
—And you won't be able to access to any of your files if you stop your monthly payment int the forseeable future! A poster posed this point, what if I retire from the industry and still want access to my files then in order to do that one would have to continuing coughing cash?
CC is no different than what they had previously: it's software that you install on your own computers and run on your own computers with files stored wherever you want them (your own computer, your own NAS, etc.). The only difference is licensing. It comes with a license that is only valid for a certain period of time. They check on this by having the software contact their servers once a month. This is no different than how Microsoft has done it with Windows and Office for some years now. What's different is that you pay a monthly fee instead of once.

Or more simply put: Adobe went from a lifetime license to one that is only valid for a certain period of time which you can choose. The longer you want the license to be valid the more you pay.

—Adobe is not offering choices and options that best serve all customers. Not all customers need or want CC!
It works for some software and for some customers but by no means all of them (they are not the first who uses such a model, it's actually a quite common one (the pay per use one) for years now). However, I think we should ask ourselves if offering loads of choices is a good idea. It usually also makes things a lot more complicated (dive into the wondrous world of Microsoft licenses and you'll know exactly what I mean).

And if Adobe doesn't listen to its customers concerns, I’d urge those who has CS6 to not jump over to CC model! But to not upgrade or switch to CC at all for at least 2 or 3 years and see how they like it!
—And during this time, one can plan to transition out of CS6 w/ other alternatives out there! Adobe may be the standard but there are other viable options!
That goes without saying. It's something you should do with any kind of software and with any kind of license model. If you need to renew than do so well beforehand because it gives you time to look at the competition. It's just being one step ahead.
 
CC is no different than what they had previously: it's software that you install on your own computers and run on your own computers with files stored wherever you want them... The only difference is licensing...What's different is that you pay a monthly fee instead of once.

While the software may install and run the same, I still want to be able to purchase a license that I own and that is not tied to a monthly bill. This is the big difference. Even if someone thinks the CC license is great, I'd still urge them to sign the petition because I believe Adobe needs to continue giving people a choice. For those who want to pay monthly and have the latest and greatest, they can do so. For those of us who want to install and own the program, upgrading on our own time-table, we should be able to do so. Depending on ones frequency of upgrading, CC may be cheaper or CS may be cheaper... For me, the previous Creative Suite upgrade path has been cheaper because I don't have a need to upgrade each new version. I went from CS3 to CS6 last year.

It comes with a license that is only valid for a certain period of time. They check on this by having the software contact their servers once a month. This is no different than how Microsoft has done it with Windows and Office for some years now.

I am not sure I agree with what you are saying, but maybe you are referring to how Microsoft checks that you are running a genuine copy of Windows, etc. I've purchased XP and Office 2010 and have been running both for several years, only paying once, and the license is valid and will continue to be valid "forever", unlike the Adobe CC model which is valid until you stop giving them money. So, I see it as being very different.

I don't want to see other software companies follow this "lease forever" idea. I can't help but think of a car lease... I want to own my car (new or used) not Lease it... Some people like the idea of leasing, because they have the newest model. But, with a car lease, you (usually) get the option to buy it out. Adobe has no "buy out" option here.
 
—Yes, I’m much aware of all of the things you brought up. It is the ending of the traditional software liscencing and offering only CC as the only choice that is the MAIN problem here. And as far I know, no other major software company has so far been able to pull this off just yet!

—This is not even about loads of choices but having 2 options of either perpetual liscencing or monthly subscription. (liken to Buying to Own and Renting! Same difference)

—The crux here is that Adobe knows that it has a Monopoly with their Publishing/Creative softwares! They have beeing buying up and getting rid most of their competition since the early 90s or so! And this is where we are!

CC is no different than what they had previously: it's software that you install on your own computers and run on your own computers with files stored wherever you want them (your own computer, your own NAS, etc.). The only difference is licensing. It comes with a license that is only valid for a certain period of time. They check on this by having the software contact their servers once a month. This is no different than how Microsoft has done it with Windows and Office for some years now. What's different is that you pay a monthly fee instead of once.

Or more simply put: Adobe went from a lifetime license to one that is only valid for a certain period of time which you can choose. The longer you want the license to be valid the more you pay.

It works for some software and for some customers but by no means all of them (they are not the first who uses such a model, it's actually a quite common one (the pay per use one) for years now). However, I think we should ask ourselves if offering loads of choices is a good idea. It usually also makes things a lot more complicated (dive into the wondrous world of Microsoft licenses and you'll know exactly what I mean).

That goes without saying. It's something you should do with any kind of software and with any kind of license model. If you need to renew than do so well beforehand because it gives you time to look at the competition. It's just being one step ahead.


----------

This article is misleading for one thing. Since when the last time your monthly Cable bill has been static from year to year?
—And some others have posted the disclaimer by Adobe that gives the users very little right w/ one of them being that they can raise the premium at any time!
—And this is just one sticking point among others!
—Users will be at the mercy of Adobe if this model is the standard and only choice!

CC is no different than what they had previously: it's software that you install on your own computers and run on your own computers with files stored wherever you want them (your own computer, your own NAS, etc.). The only difference is licensing. It comes with a license that is only valid for a certain period of time. They check on this by having the software contact their servers once a month. This is no different than how Microsoft has done it with Windows and Office for some years now. What's different is that you pay a monthly fee instead of once.

Or more simply put: Adobe went from a lifetime license to one that is only valid for a certain period of time which you can choose. The longer you want the license to be valid the more you pay.


It works for some software and for some customers but by no means all of them (they are not the first who uses such a model, it's actually a quite common one (the pay per use one) for years now). However, I think we should ask ourselves if offering loads of choices is a good idea. It usually also makes things a lot more complicated (dive into the wondrous world of Microsoft licenses and you'll know exactly what I mean).


That goes without saying. It's something you should do with any kind of software and with any kind of license model. If you need to renew than do so well beforehand because it gives you time to look at the competition. It's just being one step ahead.

Not sure if anyone else has reference this yet but CNET Article, "How Greedy is Adobe's Creative Cloud Subscription? Not very", suggests the cost isn't that bad especially for professionals who kept the old product updated. Just a thought. ;)
 
I, for one, have bought Adobe Creative Suite, and from the posts I have read it looks as though others have legally purchased the software. Comments like this aggravate me. Everyone I know pays for the software they use. It is only right to pay for a product that is produced.

Not being a graphic professional the Monthly Cloud Based Subscription Service would be wasteful for me. I purchased the Adobe software for my personal creative purposes only, and I've upgraded the software over the years. I generate no income from the use of the software. $600 a year for a product that I upgraded maybe every two years or so seems a bit much. If I was able to only pay the subscription services for the months that I used it, it may be a more viable alternative.

I agree
 
While the software may install and run the same, I still want to be able to purchase a license that I own and that is not tied to a monthly bill. This is the big difference.
I know. I was merely explaining that the CC versions only has different licensing, it's not a completely different set of apps.

I am not sure I agree with what you are saying, but maybe you are referring to how Microsoft checks that you are running a genuine copy of Windows, etc.
You can compare the Adobe CC licensing stuff to what Microsoft is doing with the Windows and Office activation checks (especially the ones in Windows 8 and Office 2013). Btw, "comparing" does not mean "the same"! What Adobe is doing is similar to Microsoft only they are taking it one step further by putting an end date on the license.

Some people like the idea of leasing, because they have the newest model. But, with a car lease, you (usually) get the option to buy it out. Adobe has no "buy out" option here.
Exactly: some like/benefit from the new licensing, others don't. However, I'm not sure about the buy out option. With a car it's a useful one if you want to continue using it personally or if you want to stop leasing. I'm not sure if that will apply to the people who like/benefit this new licensing from Adobe. Most seem to be in it for running the latest version. That's what you'll lose when you buy out.

—Yes, I’m much aware of all of the things you brought up. It is the ending of the traditional software liscencing and offering only CC as the only choice that is the MAIN problem here. And as far I know, no other major software company has so far been able to pull this off just yet!
There are many (major) companies doing this for their software (software for dentist, physiotherapists, etc. in the Netherlands are subscription based; same applies to software for things like EPD just to give you some examples). Most of them are not aimed at consumers but at companies which could be the reason why you haven't seen it yet. Adobe is different because their audience are both companies and consumers. It's the smaller companies and the consumers that seem to be very vocal about the change (in quite a lot of situations rightfully so btw).

If you dive into software licenses be prepared to enter hell because that's what it is. Not only legally, technically as well (license servers, dongles, etc. are a major PITA).

—This is not even about loads of choices but having 2 options of either perpetual liscencing or monthly subscription. (liken to Buying to Own and Renting! Same difference)
There are more options. You can stick with Adobe and in that case there are only 2 options which are the ones you mention here. However, there are other options but that requires a switch to non-Adobe software. Pick your poison.
 
i guess i will be using 5.5 for a looooong time. At first glance it doesnt sound that bad for some people however anyone planning to use the software long term screws the pooch.

im not renting my software sorry. i suggest folks look into animation software. its the next best feature rich thing next to photoshop. it will include many if not all the features.
 
As I said before, this, will increase piracy.
Because it is unacceptable the legal user to 'rent' the application suite, when the illegal user will 'own' it!!!!
(not to tell the pain of internet check)
 
My God. Has it gotten so pathetic that the idea of 'hey, you won't have to wait till the next revision for one of our brilliant new bloatware tools... you can have it today!' marketing enticement is a big selling point?

ADD called, it even thinks Adobe's gone off the deep end

CS5 or 6 will be fine for many years till some other enterprising folks come along with suitable replacements.

Die Adobe, Die
 
Why all the fear

Why the fear of change? Why such negativism? I feel Adobe has done nothing more than keep up with the times, in fact, staying ahead of the times. We do not own the software, are only licensed to use it. The more I think this through, the more a subscription model makes good business sense. That is even if you are into this stuff as a hobbyist at a serious level.:)
 
Why the fear of change? Why such negativism? I feel Adobe has done nothing more than keep up with the times, in fact, staying ahead of the times. We do not own the software, are only licensed to use it. The more I think this through, the more a subscription model makes good business sense. That is even if you are into this stuff as a hobbyist at a serious level.:)

At the very least Adobe needs to let users who've been on CC for a couple of years keep the last version of the software they rented after the end of the subscription so that one will still have access to their own files. Otherwise CC is a no go.
 
I feel Adobe has done nothing more than keep up with the times, in fact, staying ahead of the times. We do not own the software, are only licensed to use it.

The idea of renting has been around for centuries, so Adobe isn't 'keeping up with any times' as far as I can tell. Renting things serve a purpose ... usually it's a short term solution when you can't afford, or it's inconvenient, to buy something you can keep. In just about every case, you have an alternative to a rental service ... but Adobe has, in the creative community, become almost a monopoly.

No one objected to Creative Cloud when it came out a year ago, because there was still an option to buy a version you can keep. If Adobe offered a hire-purchase option for CC when it discontinued Creative Suite, then I think the outrage wouldn't be so widespread.

Adobe has posed an impossible question for those who value their Adobe products as a long term investment in their digital creative tools; how long do you think you can pay the rental? I know I don't have a definitive answer to that, but I know that I want to be able to use my digital creative tools as long as I can. So I can't use CC.
 
Why the fear of change? Why such negativism?

Because unlike you I want to use Adobe till I drop dead (hopefully not before 85) and thus did the math for my whole LIFETIME! The new subscription model will cost me about three times as much as the old model would.

The more I think this through, the more a subscription model makes good business sense.

It only makes good business sense for Adobe and people who are very bad at math - or expect to die young...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.