Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How do you know they do?
lol

More seriously… The number one reason would be the fact that it’s probably been in development for a lot longer than iOS 13 has even been around

We have no way of knowing. Just because it has been under development for a long time doesn't mean that they haven't taken advantage of any features of iOS 13 later in the development cycle.
[automerge]1572888683[/automerge]
The last time I checked, you can't do this. It's a year's commitment I believe.

You can sign up for an annual plan or a month to month plan, so you do have the ability to cancel at any time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urtules
We have no way of knowing. Just because it has been under development for a long time doesn't mean that they haven't taken advantage of any features of iOS 13 later in the development cycle.

Nor does it mean they have..

Your point is no more cogent than mine.
Let's move on - this is fruitless.
 
Nor does it mean they have..
Your point is no more cogent than mine.
Let's move on - this is fruitless.

Agree.

I am curious about the integration, if any, between Lightroom and Photoshop on the iPad. It would be very limiting if they are separate apps that don't work with each other seamlessly.
 
Adobe went to subscriptions in 2013. At the time their stock price was in the $43 range. Today their stock is almost $280. Their yearly revenues have climbed from $4 billion in 2013 to $9 billion in 2018 and are on track to hit $10 billion for 2019. Pretty obvious their customers are happy with the subscription model based on their excellent financial result since switching in 2013.

That's hardly proof that subscribers are enthusiastic about the arrangement, but proof that subscriptions are extremely more profitable for Adobe. Adobe's status is like a cable company's. They are the entrenched norm, especially in printed media. It's not like users can conveniently switch to alternatives considering workflows and hardware were established to co-exist with the software. Invested pros have little choice but to accept Adobe's business model. New pros must also consider what is the norm if they want to ensure file-sharing compatibility.

It's been demonstrated in a previous post that subscribers pay 33% more to use the latest application versions. Under the old model, owners would recover their initial investment in 2–4 years, but pay 33% less to use the software when upgrading thereafter. Some workflows are so timeless and adequate, that no upgrade is necessary for many years.

Otherwise, I agree with others that hobbyists should abandon any dependance on Adobe's tools. There are adequate alternatives that have the artistic capabilities users seek, and are suitable for publishing to the ether.
 
Although you can bring in large PSDs with lots and lots of layers editing those layers are another story. For example there is no curves in the current version of the iPad app.

I can't imagine a pro user not having a curves tool, but it doesn't surprise me. Adobe thinks users will limit their use of the iPad to composition tasks. Image correction will be reserved for the desktop. Reasonable enough. Hopefully, it's not because a growing number of users don't have a grasp of the curves tool's potential, and rely on preset filters instead.
 
Pre-Creative Cloud, a full Adobe Creative Suite could cost upwards of $2000. Now, that suite is $59/month at full price ($720/yr)

Well, yes, but that's making a virtue of the fact that Adobe software was already over-priced before they moved to subscription, and the CS bundles were priced to make you pay for apps that you probably didn't need.

Trouble is, that $2000 would probably be good for 3 years before you had a compelling reason to upgrade, at which point (previously) you'd usually have got a substantial discount on the upgrade... and even then, it didn't necessarily turn into a pumpkin after 3 years (I've got an old Mac with an ancient version of CS on it in case I need to revisit a big project I did ~10 years ago - 5 years ago that still made sense).

...so for a subscription over 3 years (reasonable lifetime for a bit of work software) that's $2160 - and no discount on subsequent years. Stop paying the subscription, the software is gone (along with any proprietary-format files you have). Oh, and Adobe's incentive to improve the software to make sure that you upgraded every few years is now gone, because you have to keep paying to keep the software.

Subscriptions aren't all bad - you can't expect free lifetime updates for a one-off payment of a hundred bucks or so and some apps, by their nature, rely on regular updates (but if that includes your photo editor, someone's holding it wrong), sometimes they're much better value if you use more than one machine and if you're in business, sometimes, a subscription has tax advantages over a one-off purpose (and some people have drunk the accountant-brewed Kool Aid that 'tax deductable' somehow means 'free').

However, Adobe products were always big-ticket items and certainly never offered free updates... or even free updates for some minor bug caused by a new OS...
 
I don’t understand Adobe saying they will add features as they see how customers use Photoshop on a mobile platform... The laptop is a mobile platform and has been seen as such for years. With that in mind, Adobe already knows how its customers will use it‘s product on a mobile platform. So why hold back features, just to get a product released?
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Well, yes, but that's making a virtue of the fact that Adobe software was already over-priced before they moved to subscription, and the CS bundles were priced to make you pay for apps that you probably didn't need.

...so for a subscription over 3 years (reasonable lifetime for a bit of work software) that's $2160 - and no discount on subsequent years. Stop paying the subscription, the software is gone (along with any proprietary-format files you have). Oh, and Adobe's incentive to improve the software to make sure that you upgraded every few years is now gone, because you have to keep paying to keep the software.

Precisely..
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko
Requires 13.1 ‘eh?
Yuck.

Compared to traditional computers, this race to always have your software be tied to the ever-changing underlying operating system versions is unbelievably annoying. This is particularly true when Apple releases such buggy hot garbage iOS versions

I don't see how this is at all different than traditional computers. Maybe you're too young to remember the pace of hardware/software/OS change in the PCs of the 80s and 90s. It's a plain fact of life that the pace of change declines as a technology matures and the focus shifts to newer technologies. Mobile may be maturing, but it's hardly reached the level of maturity we see in PCs.

Whether it's a new capability added to the CPU or GPU or new functions added to an OS, developers are going to adopt those new features. If they don't, their competitors will. Sometimes it's a matter of adding features/enhanced performance that's attractive to end users, other times it's a matter of greater efficiency in the development process, compactness of code (which affects bandwidth requirements for download-distributed products as well as speed of execution)...

For a new product (such as this), it's also a matter of whether you try to be backward-compatible with older OSes. It compounds the complexity of quality control/debugging for a product that contains no carry-forward/legacy code - 100% of the product is under test, not just the year's new features.

I'm quite certain, without ever using this, that Adobe is dependent on the "iPadOS" feature set/API. So it's purely a matter of whether they required iPadOS 13.0 or some later version. Do you seriously want to argue that a dot-zero should be preferred to a dot-one release? Is anyone losing anything by updating from dot-zero to (now) dot-two, other than some of the bugs fixed in subsequent releases?

This is certainly no longer an economic issue (new app version requiring purchase of new OS or vice versa). Adobe requiring 13.1 doesn't cost you a penny more. And Adobe's subscription model means it won't matter whether Apple releases iPadOS 14.0 in September 2020 or September 2025, you're still going to pay Adobe every month - they're no longer leveraging an OS upgrade to force a new software purchase. So just forget about the days when you may have avoided upgrading your OS for a few years so that you could get a few more years out of your $600 Photoshop purchase.

And as to the pace of OS/app updates? Yeah, before the web we might have to live with bugs for months before the next set of floppy disks or CDs/DVDs was released. Patches can be pushed out much faster today - no need to accumulate a big pile of fixes before a release becomes economically justifiable. And those updates/patches are being pushed out at no charge - no retailer involvement in the distribution process. You may consider all this to be a sign that OSes and apps are buggier than they used to be, but my own feeling is that these frequent updates each contain fewer fixes than the grand, big updates of the past. In the past, if your were unaffected by a bug you could easily ignore the patch process. Now, it's in your face. You're reminded that there are bugs to be fixed, even if none of them have affected you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urtules and MikeZTM
Arf. I use Affinity Photo and it costs me nothing each year, beyond the very reasonable purchase price.

Got my new Mini up and running, and looking for a good photo program to try out. I'm reading so many people saying good things about Affinity Photo (here and elsewhere), that I think that will be my first try.
 
Requires 13.1 ‘eh?
Yuck.

Compared to traditional computers, this race to always have your software be tied to the ever-changing underlying operating system versions is unbelievably annoying. This is particularly true when Apple releases such buggy hot garbage iOS versions
Traditional computers limit software developer to old platform's capability and can never move on to new stuff. Just look at how long it took them to support HiDPI on Windows.

iOS is only getting better. No software are build without bugs. Bug fix will always companions with new bugs and this is software for you. There's no reason to deny new stuff is getting better.
 
I don't see how this is at all different than traditional computers. Maybe you're too young to remember the pace of hardware/software/OS change in the PCs of the 80s and 90s. It's a plain fact of life that the pace of change declines as a technology matures and the focus shifts to newer technologies. Mobile may be maturing, but it's hardly reached the level of maturity we see in PCs.

Whether it's a new capability added to the CPU or GPU or new functions added to an OS, developers are going to adopt those new features. If they don't, their competitors will. Sometimes it's a matter of adding features/enhanced performance that's attractive to end users, other times it's a matter of greater efficiency in the development process, compactness of code (which affects bandwidth requirements for download-distributed products as well as speed of execution)...

For a new product (such as this), it's also a matter of whether you try to be backward-compatible with older OSes. It compounds the complexity of quality control/debugging for a product that contains no carry-forward/legacy code - 100% of the product is under test, not just the year's new features.

I'm quite certain, without ever using this, that Adobe is dependent on the "iPadOS" feature set/API. So it's purely a matter of whether they required iPadOS 13.0 or some later version. Do you seriously want to argue that a dot-zero should be preferred to a dot-one release? Is anyone losing anything by updating from dot-zero to (now) dot-two, other than some of the bugs fixed in subsequent releases?

This is certainly no longer an economic issue (new app version requiring purchase of new OS or vice versa). Adobe requiring 13.1 doesn't cost you a penny more. And Adobe's subscription model means it won't matter whether Apple releases iPadOS 14.0 in September 2020 or September 2025, you're still going to pay Adobe every month - they're no longer leveraging an OS upgrade to force a new software purchase. So just forget about the days when you may have avoided upgrading your OS for a few years so that you could get a few more years out of your $600 Photoshop purchase.

And as to the pace of OS/app updates? Yeah, before the web we might have to live with bugs for months before the next set of floppy disks or CDs/DVDs was released. Patches can be pushed out much faster today - no need to accumulate a big pile of fixes before a release becomes economically justifiable. And those updates/patches are being pushed out at no charge - no retailer involvement in the distribution process. You may consider all this to be a sign that OSes and apps are buggier than they used to be, but my own feeling is that these frequent updates each contain fewer fixes than the grand, big updates of the past. In the past, if your were unaffected by a bug you could easily ignore the patch process. Now, it's in your face. You're reminded that there are bugs to be fixed, even if none of them have affected you.

One more thing:
There's no iPadOS 13.0 exist. The first iPadOS release was iPadOS 13.1
 
  • Like
Reactions: ApfelKuchen
If would work that would be great....
just keeps saying can’t connect to adobe servers!
 

Attachments

  • 07C19756-64B3-4DFC-877D-B2E73E1C7F4F.png
    07C19756-64B3-4DFC-877D-B2E73E1C7F4F.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 136
So this release is for compositors yet it is only 8 bit with no option yet to change that. What happens if I take a 16bit desktop file and try to open on the iPad?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.