Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Using the traditional method of purchasing software... in 5-10 years you'd have a bunch of old DVDs with outdated versions of the software.

I'm sure there are people right now with boxes of CS2, CS4 and CS6.

Sure... you "own" that copy of CS2... but what good is it doing?

You can't legally do anything with it. It's just a piece of plastic and some paper manuals.

I can easily argue that CS2 is still viable for a ton of work. I don't use it - but I know people that still do.

What I can't understand is the need for some of (you) to justify the need to constantly upgrade. You don't NEED to upgrade. Most of the time you WANT to upgrade. Big difference.

----------

You are clear enough, but I don't see the need to be owner of software which isn't worth anything in years ahead and can't probably not even been used eight years later..

Apparently I'm not clear enough.

5-10 years from now you will NOT be able to BUY any version of CS(whatever). ONLY subscribe. Do you understand the difference? in 5-10 years - when you start your CS subscription you will never ever own the software. So if you stop paying - you can't open/use your files.

I am NOT talking about using CS6 in 10 years.
 
I can easily argue that CS2 is still viable for a ton of work. I don't use it - but I know people that still do.

What I can't understand is the need for some of (you) to justify the need to constantly upgrade. You don't NEED to upgrade. Most of the time you WANT to upgrade. Big difference.

I see the difference now.

People who upgrade:
That copy of CS2 you own is kinda irrelevant after you've upgraded to CS4 or whatever. You're just left with a DVD of CS2 to keep on the shelf.

People who don't upgrade:
If CS2 is all you need... then hold onto it.
 
That's simply nonsense. Big updates came out each 2 years, when you speak about 4 years you're talking about 2 mayor updates minimum. When you also calculate the cost you'll not pay more. Those are facts.

Couple of issues here. We use Lightroom and Photoshop so the educational price (assuming no bulk licensing) wil be $30 a month. We already own these programs, so would just need to update occasionally at this point, but even assuming we didn't That is $275 per seat (at our institution). At $30 a month we hit that wall at 10 months.

But the bigger problem is this. Our department has seen a 25% reduction in its operating budget since the housing crash. This has meant almost no purchases. really just emergency purchases, for a couple of years now. This isn't unusual for most universities. So we haven't been upgrading our software. We can make do with what we have. If we switch to the CC model (and budgets ae starting to get restored) what do we do when the next cuts come in and we have to cut our software payments? Before, we would have the old software to at least keep going. Under the new system, we would have that same old software, what we have now. The question is, would it run on the updated machines? We could be looking at a situation where we have no software to teach on. So maybe we should shift those expenses to the students, its not like they have enormous debt already.
 
happy?

...Having been an Adobe user for the past 20+ years, as well as many other software developers, I'm very happy to have a monthly fee of $49.95 a month rather than dumping thousands of dollars every couple of years....

I am willing to wager the average professional user has not paid anywhere near $12,000 for Adobe software products over the last 20 years. It is not the bargain you, or anyone else thinks it is. It changes the paradigm of choosing to upgrade your software when the offering is compelling enough to be worth the money, to no choice at all. This is a cynical move that almost admits there are no great advances to come, nor any reason to make them.

The path to this cloud rental scheme was paved when software companies started suing folks who were trying to sell their used, old software copies, arguing that end users did not really own the software they purchased. This closed off the market for buying back editions, and negated any intrinsic value the old software may have had. (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...major-ruling-upholds-tough-software-licenses/).
 
Last edited:
I know my craft very well, than you very much. You really want to tell me that I should take a good shot to being with? Buddy, when I began my photography training, every shot counted as I was using film. Yes film, a thin layer of gelatin chemically charged with a light-sensitive emulsion. There were no instant previews and the scene needed to be perfect before you even opened the shutter because the only do-over was a complete re-shoot. When it came to processing, I had to go into an actual dark room with smelly chemicals. I can still remember the smell of fixer being stuck in my hair and fingernails. The closest thing there was to Photoshop in the darkroom were the tricks learned while using an enlarger but the finished product relied solely on the shot being right in the first place. When digital came in, I brought all that knowledge and experience with me and I make sure every shot counts before I even go into my digital darkroom. The tools might have changed but the technique has not. Don't ever categorize me as one of those amateurs that relies on Photoshop to make my images look better than they really are.

The beauty about Photoshop CSx is that it is a complete package compared to Lightroom or Aperture. I remember when those came out and I did try them out and thought to myself that they were as dumbed-down as Photoshop Essentials. I have all the tools I'll ever need and then some in a single application without having to buy separate baby software in addition to Photoshop because a bunch of people aren't as tech savvy as some of us.

You are extremely arrogant. I don't care where you are in your career or where you started. To dismiss other photographers for using software that you choose to not use is simply wrong.

Please send us a link to your portfolio so that we can see the brilliance of your work. I will then shut up whilst I cower in awe. If not, get off your high horse and get over yourself. What failure in you makes you so enraged that you have to go out of your way to insult the approaches of others?
 
Just to play devil's advocate...

How much is "cheaper?" There's no guarantees that a lower priced product will sell enough copies. You're going to have to make up your profits with volume, which is not guaranteed, especially if people don't upgrade each time. Also consider that people pirate movies and music which are far cheaper than any software will be. I mean, when Installous was around for jailbroken phones, there were cracks of 99 cent apps!

And a lower price may NOT even spur sales... Gibson Guitars had trouble selling their guitars until they raised prices.

Again, just as devil's advocate. I'm not thrilled either (and will stay on CS6 for as long as I can) but I'm still not sure there's a win-win alternative out there.

I think the 60%+ mark-up for Europe needs to be addressed. And there should be more than the two choices currently available - use one app (€24.90 = $33 p.m.), or all (€61.49 = $81 p.m.). There should be a pick-and-mix option for those of us who only want or need 2 or 3 apps.
 
...
The beauty about Photoshop CSx is that it is a complete package compared to Lightroom or Aperture. I remember when those came out and I did try them out and thought to myself that they were as dumbed-down as Photoshop Essentials. I have all the tools I'll ever need and then some in a single application without having to buy separate baby software in addition to Photoshop because a bunch of people aren't as tech savvy as some of us.


You can't compare Aperture to Photoshop. Aperture is not "dumbed down" it is intended for a fast work flow while PS is an image editor. In fact inside Aperture's preferences box is a field where you can enter your "Image Editor" app. I assume most people enter Photoshop or PS Elements.

No matter how fast you are in PS it will never be as fast as Aperture where I can work on my first image before the second image has downloaded from the CF card. I can sort out "selects" about as fast as they download and I can do batch white balance of 50 images all at the same time. PS was never designed for that and Aperture was never designed to allow corection layers or masks. They are complimentary.

A lot depends on what you do. If it is sports, those guys shoot 1,000 frames and have to have then selected out and edits on short deadline. They'd be nuts not to use LR or Aperture or som other high volume processor
 
But the bigger problem is this. Our department has seen a 25% reduction in its operating budget since the housing crash. This has meant almost no purchases. really just emergency purchases, for a couple of years now. This isn't unusual for most universities. So we haven't been upgrading our software. We can make do with what we have. If we switch to the CC model (and budgets ae starting to get restored) what do we do when the next cuts come in and we have to cut our software payments?....


WHY continue with Adobe? There are other options. In fact there are good free options. Look at Gimp and Inkscape both are free.

THat really is the worst thingabout renting software, you can't skip a payment. You are commited forever. Why would anyone commit to that when there are good free alternatives?

I think Adobe has decided that they don't need customers who skip versions and don't upgrade. Why should they care about those users? They will now only have customers who generate revenue. Maybe only 1/3rd as many users but more overall money. Getting rid of your worst customers is not a bad plan.
 
Apparently I'm not clear enough.

5-10 years from now you will NOT be able to BUY any version of CS(whatever). ONLY subscribe. Do you understand the difference? in 5-10 years - when you start your CS subscription you will never ever own the software. So if you stop paying - you can't open/use your files.

I am NOT talking about using CS6 in 10 years.

Again, you're clear enough, but you don't seem to understand or at least see my point of view in this. I understand perfectly that you would like to "buy" software in 10 years time and owning it instead of renting it. You explain that over and over.

I'm just stating that "owning" software doesn't makes much sense simply because the same software will be obsolete after some years, in other words it wont be of much use and after each year will even become less and less of use to a certain point that nobody will be using it anyway. You're left with crap.

That's why I don't see the point in buying software, especially not in the context where Adobe comes in, they constantly come up with new market leading software and people do upgrade at some given time, simply because they need to come along with the market standards.

I'm not trying to convince you here and you're entitled to have your own vision of this, I'm just stating mine based on my own experience in the field.
 
Adobe CC
USA $49 p.m., EU $82 p.m. - 67% mark-up

Which is why Adobe won't be getting my money. North American pricing is good, but Adobe have been robbing the rest of the world for years. I can accept a small increase in pricing for taxes etc, but not that much.

I'd love nothing more than to see this fail. I'd be even happier to see a financially crippled Adobe. I detest their business practises.
 
Couple of issues here. We use Lightroom and Photoshop so the educational price (assuming no bulk licensing) wil be $30 a month. We already own these programs, so would just need to update occasionally at this point, but even assuming we didn't That is $275 per seat (at our institution). At $30 a month we hit that wall at 10 months.

But the bigger problem is this. Our department has seen a 25% reduction in its operating budget since the housing crash. This has meant almost no purchases. really just emergency purchases, for a couple of years now. This isn't unusual for most universities. So we haven't been upgrading our software. We can make do with what we have.

You can simply use your programs you've bought. You're not (!) forced to go buy a CC account. The latest bought versions of Adobe will still be updated, Adobe has promised to so. Only after a year or so when CC is so much progressed they will stop updating the versions you've bought. But still then you can use Lightroom you've bought as long you like.

I don't find the excuse that things going bad economically a solid one. If things go bad economically wise then you can't spend hundreds of dollars as well for buying a program that at some point will have payed updates as well. It's about having money or not. As for my own company I've saved up reserves for paying expenses like software to begin with. Because I want to be up to date I save money up to hundreds of euro's (in my case euro's) each year so I know that I always will be able to buy update. Instead of paying everything in one single payment I pay a small percentage each month which basically is the same as when I would pay up front.

I can also subtract the payments I make from taxes, so the actual prizes are in reality even way lower then you see on the Adobe website because because I'm paying Adobe I can pay less taxes each year. For education it's even better, schools, in Holland that is, can even subtract WAY more then I can do each year being a commercial company....


If your company, or any to be precise, don't have the budget to pay a monthly prize then you can still use the old software. You couldn't update your old software in the old system as well because that would cost you money as well...

You can only argue that at some point you might have just enough money for updating one software program and despite being broke then you can use it for a while further on. But there is a thin line between able to buy updates, a CC account and the argument of not having enough money. In short, you can't blame Adobe for your financial issues if any.


If we switch to the CC model (and budgets ae starting to get restored) what do we do when the next cuts come in and we have to cut our software payments?

You would need to make priorities as any company does. Like you need to save financial reserves for basic things you need like electricity, payments for the people cleaning your school/company, salary for the teachers and the money for renting the license of software your students are working with.

If money is short, then you can decide to work on old versions you have now, or you could decide to cut finances on other fronts to get more money for CC accounts. It's about priorities.

New software cost money, either using CC or not CC to begin with. Updates cost money. A good organized school would have a list of priorities and a good overview of the cost. Based on that you make decisions. But you can't, again, blame Adobe, that they're not giving the software for free. I know you don't but most of the negative responses I read here are all on the same thing: it cost money and I dare to state that many among the reactions are using illegal software and feel suddenly very much restricted which I can imagine.

For those who actually pay for their software, I'm among them, just know that the cost are not that much higher then it would be when buying the new software on disk. On top of that you get more updates, free to use hundreds of commercial fonts worth $25.000, online space to share you work with others and clients a much much better workflow because everything, like settings, are being synced on all your devises, etc. The list of benefits is long.

And once again, if you're using bought software, I've got CS6 Master Collection, you can still use that and for the coming year it will be still be update but only concerning bugs. I decided to switch to CC anyway because I like the workflow and the extra's it offers. I'm not a billionaire, just a graphical and an interaction designer myself but luckily with a company that's financial healthy and like most companies do I also save up money for the cost to come.

Meanwhile, I get access to all of Adobe's products and because I earn money with it I find it nothing more then reasonable to spend some money each month on the company so they can provide me with even better software.

Before, we would have the old software to at least keep going. Under the new system, we would have that same old software, what we have now.

Under the old system as well as long you don't decide to update.

The question is, would it run on the updated machines?

Yes and no. Yes, most of the old materials will work on CC versions yes. You might aspect issues the other way around. But that was also the case in the "old" model where C6 materials would sometimes cause issues when using it on a CS3 version. But you can, like in the old model, still save materials within CC as a CS5 document in order to be able to load it on an older version. That's what I've been told by Adobe themselves.

We could be looking at a situation where we have no software to teach on. So maybe we should shift those expenses to the students, its not like they have enormous debt already.

There are several ways to "create" money in order to get those licenses. It's not up for me to decide which ways you should take. But materials, machines, software cost money, weather you're buying a license or when you need to rent it. Each school and firm need to understand that. There is no such thing as running an office without having any expenses to make.
 
I am willing to wager the average professional user has not paid anywhere near $12,000 for Adobe software products over the last 20 years. It is not the bargain you, or anyone else thinks it is. It changes the paradigm of choosing to upgrade your software when the offering is compelling enough to be worth the money, to no choice at all. This is a cynical move that almost admits there are no great advances to come, nor any reason to make them.

The path to this cloud rental scheme was paved when software companies started suing folks who were trying to sell their used, old software copies, arguing that end users did not really own the software they purchased. This closed off the market for buying back editions, and negated any intrinsic value the old software may have had. (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...major-ruling-upholds-tough-software-licenses/).

Well, of course $20,000 couldn't be true being that Adobe didn't offer all of the Master Collection programs for that past 20 year. They only acquired Macromedia in 2005 and have developed new software over those 20 years.

But in actuality, based on the previous model of an 18 month upgrade cycle, at he cost of $600 per upgrade, plus the initial purchase price of the Master Collection (listing around $2,600), over 20 years that comes out to about $10,000.

While lower overall, the hassles for upgrading, finding the funds and justifications with the corporate purse strings (or the freelancer who has to come up with $600 or risk falling behind their clients or competitors), Adobe wanting to keep a consistent flow of cash rather than a huge bump every 18 month and other issues from the previous model, the cost will only help create stronger tools in the long run. Additionally they can move faster to update certain features rather than wait for 18 months.

I sense the paranoia that people are sharing online, but remember that this subscription between the user and Adobe is a relationship and Adobe has to foster good will with the users on a daily basis now. It's foolish to think that Adobe will become this big brother threatening to raise prices randomly and ignore bugs or issues with their software for months on end because "we have them by the short and curlies!!!"

I see this as driving fixes faster in the future and helping Adobe cope with the changing dynamics of the software game. One of the reasons we had a hard time getting Adobe to fix bugs is that they couldn't fund that aspect of the software and instead focused their attentions to the next big wave of money, the upgrade cycle. This allows them to be more flexible and respond sooner. I may be wrong, we'll see.

At least that's my opinion, but I can't help those that want to abandon 20+ years of development for a $30 program that is 'just as good as Photoshop'... really? Sure, base your career on that. Good luck.
 
I sense the paranoia that people are sharing online, but remember that this subscription between the user and Adobe is a relationship and Adobe has to foster good will with the users on a daily basis now. It's foolish to think that Adobe will become this big brother threatening to raise prices randomly and ignore bugs or issues with their software for months on end because "we have them by the short and curlies!!!"

I see this as driving fixes faster in the future and helping Adobe cope with the changing dynamics of the software game. One of the reasons we had a hard time getting Adobe to fix bugs is that they couldn't fund that aspect of the software and instead focused their attentions to the next big wave of money, the upgrade cycle. This allows them to be more flexible and respond sooner. I may be wrong, we'll see.

At least that's my opinion, but I can't help those that want to abandon 20+ years of development for a $30 program that is 'just as good as Photoshop'... really? Sure, base your career on that. Good luck.

Amen! Thumbs up. If people want to make professional products with programs worth $30 buck by any means, be my guest! I so much agree with what written above quoted.

It's very simple, with CC you, in random order:

1. get way more updates faster instead to wait for those for years

2. get the ease of integrating professional font for commercial use worth $25.000

3. Get the ease of the cloud workflow, the way I work with Photoshop, the settings on two monitors will be synchronized with my other devices. So when working in the studio I can work further on at home in a surrounding I'm familiar with.

4. I get storage, not that I'll constantly use it for presentation uses since I prefer live presentation in the old fashion way (prints boards etc), but at least I can use it when the client can't be physically here for use as presentation

5. No more awkward methods getting the right disc with serial numbers for installation when buying a new machine where I would like the products on. No more installing and searching for combo updates, just a click on the button and all programs will be installed, up to date with all of my presets at hand.

6. No need to think of updating where normally I should pay once more several hundreds of euro's.

7. No more stock piles of boxes with outdated software nobody is using. I've got CS3 here, worthless.

8. Not unimportant, access to "new" program's that Adobe is presenting, not that I'm going for "all" of the programs but at least I can have a look at it, hack, I can even work with the new program's they come up with without having to pay anything extra's so when in 5 years time a new program called X will become very popular and for me handy to use with the products I'm making I can at least study and have enough knowledge base / know-how about it so when a client or colleague says do it with this or that program I know where they are talking about.
I've granted myself an R&D (Research and Development) one day each week. I've studied Music Technology once, many years ago, and I got one more attracted using Audition and took online lessons to dust off my old knowledge about making music with it. I'm using it now to update Voice-Overs with business movies we make for clients. This saved me money as well as before I needed to pay Voice-overs extra money to make the sound better. Now I can do this myself....

Don't get me wrong. I'm NO Adobe's salesmen, I've NO connection with Adobe whatsoever, I'm just speaking about it based on experiences I've had with Adobe products as to today. The cloud is for sure heaven for me. Yes it cost me a few bucks a month, but with all the advantages I'm getting with it it's really cheap. They provide me with products I make money with. Simple, so I've no problem at all to pay a monthly small amount of money in order to get a way more frequent updates.
 
Again, you're clear enough, but you don't seem to understand or at least see my point of view in this. I understand perfectly that you would like to "buy" software in 10 years time and owning it instead of renting it. You explain that over and over.

I'm just stating that "owning" software doesn't makes much sense simply because the same software will be obsolete after some years, in other words it wont be of much use and after each year will even become less and less of use to a certain point that nobody will be using it anyway. You're left with crap.

That's why I don't see the point in buying software, especially not in the context where Adobe comes in, they constantly come up with new market leading software and people do upgrade at some given time, simply because they need to come along with the market standards.

I'm not trying to convince you here and you're entitled to have your own vision of this, I'm just stating mine based on my own experience in the field.

Understood.

However I disagree obviously. Because if I choose (my choice) to not upgrade for 3 years or 4 years - my tools are obviously still of value to me. And I get more bang for my buck because over time - the total cost of ownership is less. It's purely subjective that software that is a year or two old is no longer usable. Would you say CS3 is crap? Right now. Honestly. Sure CS4-6 bring a lot to the table IF you use those functions. But is CS3 unusable? Crap? Not at all. And that is software from 2008. 5 years ago. Which illustrates my point.

Again - we all love to have the latest and greatest. But the choice was always are when that would be. Now it's not under the current model.

We'll never agree on what is crap/usable or not I gather though. You seem to believe that only the latest is worth "owning." And I disagree.
 
....... Because I want to be up to date I save money up to hundreds of euro's (in my case euro's) each year so I know that I always will be able to buy update. Instead of paying everything in one single payment I pay a small percentage each month which basically is the same as when I would pay up front.

Obviously you're an ideal candidate for this subscription model, one of Adobes target clients for sure. I'm still totally non-plussed as to why so many people who rely on these tools for their businesses, would agree to an arrangement as asymmetrical as this one. All the control is in the hands of the supplier, once on board, the longer you stay on board, the more you stand to lose if you can no longer pay the rent. And what if you don't like some aspects of future developments down the line? it's not like you can withhold payments. It really is a financial directors wet dream come true.

I only really use Photoshop and Illustrator from the suite, I only upgrade as and when, so continuous payment definitely does not fit with my practice. I know that my CS6 won't last forever, but I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. One thing I'm sure about, from all the forum activity across the web, is that there are a lot of people in the same boat as myself, resolved to make their existing Adobe packages serve as long as possible. Almost 35 000 people have signed the online petition to date, most stating as much.

Another thing I'm sure about is that Adobe is a company that loves money and doesn't mind pissing people off. As a registered CSx user, you can't bet Adobe will be keeping an eye on their database to see how many people remain on CSx only. In a few years, I wouldn't be very surprised if they came up with some kind of stand alone upgrade offer for CS5 - CS6 users. Even if it were only 35 000 users, at say $350_00 an upgrade, that would be a nice little windfall of $12.25 million, should cover a bonus for the CEOs. If not, fingers crossed, Pixelmator et al are mature enough 5 years down the line to replace CS6.

But seriously, to all those arguing the corner of a multi billion dollar corporation...Really?
 
I'm not posting a link to the article... but FYI - It's already been cracked...

Not surprising - and if not able to be "plugged" - Adobe hasn't gained much to combat piracy.
 
Understood.

However I disagree obviously. Because if I choose (my choice) to not upgrade for 3 years or 4 years -

Only then it's cheaper indeed then having a CC subscription. So yes, you''re in a disadvantage here and in this context I understand your frustration but updating from CS3 to, let's say 6, wasn't possible in the old model as well. I think you could only update as far of 2 CS versions. In other words if you're still using CS3 and want to update to CS7 at some time you needed to buy the whole package once more. Meaning more then thousand of dollars so even then a CC account wouldn't have cost you 'that' much more.

The only benefits with update when you've bought a license would be if you update to two version ahead. If it became 3 or more you still needed to pay lot's of extra's. That's why I decided to update CS5 up all the way to 6, skipping 5.5.

my tools are obviously still of value to me. And I get more bang for my buck because over time - the total cost of ownership is less.

True, but not dramatically less..

It's purely subjective that software that is a year or two old is no longer usable.

Well, it's really not. I get PSD files made with CS6 from clients pretty often. I can ask if they would save it in CS4 mode if I've had CS4. Doesn't really look professional in my point of view, stating that you as a company stating that you do multimedia can't even "read" CS6 files. That's, among many others, one reason why I prefer to update software so that I as a company at least can state to my clients that we're working with the latest new techniques.

It's ok for me to save a PSD file into CS4 mode if a client works with an older version, but for me, asking good money for my services I like to show the client that whatever file he or she can give to me I've no problems reading it...

Your story only applies when you're, for instance as an example, a designer making painting, printing those out and selling these. Customers don't need to know and quite rightfully don't even care if you have made your designs on CS3, CS4 or CS 6. It's about the end product, not about the software. But in my field, being a designer, interaction designer and working with videofiles I need to be able to get along with the market standards as stated above. Working with CS3 "master" edition will simply won't work for me at all.

Would you say CS3 is crap?

Crap is a maybe a strong word, but for me it comes along with so much technical issues as described above that it's pretty worthless for me yes.

Right now. Honestly. Sure CS4-6 bring a lot to the table IF you use those functions. But is CS3 unusable? Crap? Not at all. And that is software from 2008. 5 years ago. Which illustrates my point.

For the work I do it's a prehistoric program. I can restore old pictures heavely damaged waaaay faster with CS6 then with CS3. I've done a heavy assignment where I needed to restore extremely old photographs with a combination of Photoshop and Lightroom, with the new Lightroom now you can so much faster trace spots to correct them with the visualizing spots options. And I'm talking about very Hi-Res pictures, so even on a large monitors (i'm using two large monitors) it's a pain zoom in and to drag the whole picture to each end in "search" for spots. With the new visualization tool it's matter of seconds. You don't have that in CS3. What CS3 also lacks big time is that's not 64 bit native. I work on a Mac Pro that's 64 bit with having Adobe products, the latest versions, working in 64 makes a hell of a difference when you look at speed. And what I'm telling you here is just a tip of the iceberg so to speak...

So no, CS3 is not crap no, but it does brings "me" <-- back years in speed, possibilities and workflow.

Again - we all love to have the latest and greatest. But the choice was always are when that would be. Now it's not under the current model.

Hey, I agree with you that updates is not always a necessary thing. True! I give you that, but for me the updates always came along with new tools that truly made "mine" workflow better. Sometimes slightly, sometimes not at all but most of the time a bit and sometimes big time. When I look at the updates I conclude that Adobe is truly listening to it's users because the updates always, so far that is, deals with issues most people are really dealing with. For instance, the new technology Thunderbold (even 2 soon) is nice, you'll have extremely fast access to a large amount of photo's to edit within Lightroom 5. But what if you don't have Thunderbold technology yet? Like me, I have this storage device
1314269956.png
, it's great! But it's not as fast as Thunderbolt. With Lightroom 5 I can choose to make "small" previews of many thousands of pictures I got and edit those with all the tools available. When done I can load the larger files and use the editing I've done on the original photo's. The result is simple, I can now brows and work so much faster with my collections then ever before. Even when the backup is devise is off the network...

We'll never agree on what is crap/usable or not I gather though. You seem to believe that only the latest is worth "owning." And I disagree.

No, I simply conclude that between versions, especially between CS3 and CC in the cloud there is a world of difference in in "my" field of work a mayor difference in the workflow. Working in CS3 would cost me simply WAY more time with all the things I'm doing in my field of work. Of you're only making a design in photoshop CS3 is still useful but it drastic limit you with co-operating with other business working with higher versions.

----------

I'm not posting a link to the article... but FYI - It's already been cracked...

Not surprising - and if not able to be "plugged" - Adobe hasn't gained much to combat piracy.

Well that might be good news for you and certainly good news for others.

For me, I don't care if their products can be hacked or not. I take my work that I make with Adobe seriously, there products pay's my bills so I pay for the usage of their products. For me it's a basic principle that you pay for stuff you're using.
 
No, it's not. Master Suite was $2,600 (and didn't even include Lightroom), so you'd need to use it for nearly 4 1/2 years before you recovered the cost of CC at $600/yr. At which point it would be hopelessly out of date with your OS, plugins, and other apps you use with it.

If you're just a guy who wants to noodle around in Photoshop a bit, I get it. It's expensive and impractical. But for professionals, I think it's great. You have a fixed price, don't need to make painful decisions about when/if to upgrade, and always have the very latest versions of everything they make.

There are many professionals who only use Photoshop. Very few people utilize the entire master suite. Justify it all you like, but at the end of the day, you have fewer buying options, and you're paying more unless you have very poor buying habits.
 
Well that might be good news for you and certainly good news for others.

For me, I don't care if their products can be hacked or not. I take my work that I make with Adobe seriously, there products pay's my bills so I pay for the usage of their products. For me it's a basic principle that you pay for stuff you're using.

I buy my software. It's not good news for me. Just obvious news. And a hit to Adobe if they believed for a second this model would prevent it.
 
One thing I'm sure about, from all the forum activity across the web, is that there are a lot of people in the same boat as myself, resolved to make their existing Adobe packages serve as long as possible. Almost 35 000 people have signed the online petition to date, most stating as much.


35.000 is nothing when you're looking at how many people using Adobe Products. And once again, you're stating that's it's a money machine "wet dreams for them and such" while the pricing isn't that much higher as the older model where you needed to update at certain point anyway because else you wound end up with paying for the whole package once more because you couldn't update CS3 way up to 6 as example.

You can disagree with the new system what you like, but I refuse to go along with blunt lies that it's just a way to gain more money. I stay with the facts. The hardest complainers, also among some of my friends in the field, using Adobe products illegally and simply can't stand paying for software to start with. Fine with me, I couldn't care less. I take my work seriously and I'm willing to pay for the software that enables me to make a honest earning.

The good part is, that roughly more then 80% of my friends in working in the creative field all-ready have a CC account. So to assume this model will be a disaster as some do is just emotion talking.



Another thing I'm sure about is that Adobe is a company that loves money and doesn't mind pissing people off.

That's so subjective. I'm not going there in this discussion. again, emotional talk to me.

As a registered CSx user, you can't bet Adobe will be keeping an eye on their database to see how many people remain on CSx only. In a few years, I wouldn't be very surprised if they came up with some kind of stand alone upgrade offer for CS5 - CS6 users. Even if it were only 35 000 users, at say $350_00 an upgrade, that would be a nice little windfall of $12.25 million, should cover a bonus for the CEOs. If not, fingers crossed, Pixelmator et al are mature enough 5 years down the line to replace CS6.

Well, they might, I've no problems with that. But I'm not going to wait 6 years where I can make money with the newest Adobe Products and certainly not going to wait 6 years before I "might" be able to learn new techniques that comes along with all the updates that have missed 6 years....

But seriously, to all those arguing the corner of a multi billion dollar corporation...Really?

I'm not really arguing, I just see a lot of emotional reactions, based on false interpretations and misleading preconceptions. My goal isn't to convince people to use CC, I really don't give a F if people using it or not or calling Adobe Darth Vader. People are allowed to say whatever they like, even if what they are saying is simply not true and based on frustration, emotion or even honest disbelief about Adobe's new approach. I say, when you look at the facts with the new prize system it all makes sense. And I'm already witnessed that Adobe delivers what they have promised so far.

I want to move forward not waiting years for a huge update or not that cost me hundreds of euro's. Now I'm just up to date as long I pay, and I'm very happy with that.

----------

I buy my software. It's not good news for me. Just obvious news. And a hit to Adobe if they believed for a second this model would prevent it.

Well... you can't buy new software on DVD any longer. So... you can hit Adobe as much you digitally like but that's reality of today. You better accept it or not, which is within your good right to do so. Paint might be nice to use as well ;)
 
Well... you can't buy new software on DVD any longer. So... you can hit Adobe as much you digitally like but that's reality of today. You better accept it or not, which is within your good right to do so. Paint might be nice to use as well ;)

You seem to be hung up on DVDs. I haven't owned a DVD of an Adobe product in years. You realize you can simply download the software on their site, right?
 
You seem to be hung up on DVDs. I haven't owned a DVD of an Adobe product in years. You realize you can simply download the software on their site, right?

Yups, I do. But I prefer DVD's before and those you could buy/order just before CC went reality. Now I've tasted what CC can do I happy to say that I'll never ever building stockpiles of DVD's with software that becomes obsolete.
 
the pricing isn't that much higher as the older model where you needed to update at certain point anyway

You keep saying this and it isn't true. I use (and, crucially, only need) Design Standard. Adobe's new model means that I will pay the equivalent of full retail box price for Design Standard every two years.

Financially, this new model makes me significantly worse off.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.