Tell Adobe to get off of their cloud

[Benny Profane]

Is everyone aware of Adobe software now going to the cloud for an expensive (over time) subscription pricing model? If you stop paying, how will you open your files? I don't know about most, but, in my case, Photoshop just doubled and maybe tripled in price. A monopolistic money grab, if there ever was one. I'm buying a hard copy of CS6 asap even though it sucks compared to 5.

This guy does a good rant: http://damnuglyphotography.wordpress...reative-cloud/

Sign the petitions.

[smmokan]

Adobe is a business, they can price their products however they want. Consumers will speak with their wallets, not a petition.




(but I get all the bitching because I think it's a really stupid idea)

[ACH]

Still waiting to see how they will roll this out.
Seems to me that the concept assumes that everyone using their products has a solid internet connection. What happens when it drops?
Or if you need to work at a location where you might not have access to the cloud? What then?

[Benny Profane]

Still waiting to see how they will roll this out.
Seems to me that the concept assumes that everyone using their products has a solid internet connection. What happens when it drops?
Or if you need to work at a location where you might not have access to the cloud? What then?

Right. I think the crucial time is a moment every month, when payment is due. No pay, no PS, like your cable. Otherwise, it's on your hard drive.

[Fuzz]

Agree it's a stupid idea mainly because it is a true rental model -- I cannot buy the software anymore, I can only rent it. And if I stop paying, I do not have any software anymore, which is a big disincentive for getting locked in in the first place -- after all the money spent there's nothing to show for it. Especially if I have a lot of layered PSD files. I guess Adobe maybe sees them as a captive audience (must keep paying to retain access to software that can read PSD files), but it'll also drive a lot of people away from becoming captives in the first place.

A better model would have been a rent-to-own scheme. You rent it. But after say 24 months of renting, you can stop paying and keep that version of the software without any further updates.

I hear many people playing up the whole upgrade aspect, that I'll always stay updated with the latest version, but for me, and for many/most hobbyists, that's not really a big issue. I'm happy using older versions of Photoshop and don't want to pay to upgrade to the latest version every year.

Thankfully, I use Lightroom for 99.99% of my editing, and LR is still staying as a standalone package (for now).

[Benny Profane]

Adobe is a business, they can price their products however they want. Consumers will speak with their wallets, not a petition.




(but I get all the bitching because I think it's a really stupid idea)

And where, pray tell, is an alternative for professionals and serious hobbyists?
You could have predicted this when they bought Macromedia, the only competition.

[Fuzz]

Still waiting to see how they will roll this out.
Seems to me that the concept assumes that everyone using their products has a solid internet connection. What happens when it drops?
Or if you need to work at a location where you might not have access to the cloud? What then?

The application is installed on your local machine. The app will dial in to the cloud once every 6 months to validate your subscription. So you could go up to 6 months without internet.

[smmokan]

And where, pray tell, is an alternative for professionals and serious hobbyists?
You could have predicted this when they bought Macromedia, the only competition.

I don't know enough about software alternatives to answer that question, but I'm sure there's something on the market... right? Maybe this is an opportunity for their competition to step up and grab market share.

I, like Fuzz, use Lightroom for 99.9% of my editing so it doesn't affect me all that much. I don't care about having the most up-to-date version either.

[Benny Profane]

I don't know enough about software alternatives to answer that question, but I'm sure there's something on the market... right? Maybe this is an opportunity for their competition to step up and grab market share.

I, like Fuzz, use Lightroom for 99.9% of my editing, so it doesn't affect me all that much. I don't care about having the most up-to-date version either.

No, there isn't anything close.

[shroom]

No, there isn't anything close.

really subjective based on your needs. pro? yeah you probably need it. hobbyist? LR or a free alternative (GIMP kills it for me at all except photo stitching) is probably more than plenty.

[Benny Profane]

really subjective based on your needs. pro? yeah you probably need it. hobbyist? LR or a free alternative (GIMP kills it for me at all except photo stitching) is probably more than plenty.

You do understand that is very much like telling me that two year old gaper rental skis are just fine for most conditions, right?
Well, I'll always have a job......

[systemoverblow'd]

I'm buying a hard copy of CS6 asap even though it sucks compared to 5.

#1 - You're an idiot.
#2 - If it sucks (again, you're an idiot) why not just keep CS5.5?

[iscariot]

GIMP.

Open Office.

Old Adobe versions.

Many problems solved for free.

[Hugh Conway]

No, there isn't anything close.

I guess the "creative professionals" are screwed then. For everybody else this was the epiphany that Adobe's dead to them.

[shroom]

You do understand that is very much like telling me that two year old gaper rental skis are just fine for most conditions, right?
Well, I'll always have a job......

for most people, yeah they probably are. but go ahead, buy some 18 din fks to keep your old dusty bones locked-in on your 100 mm fatties

[Todds]

I'll stick with the CS4 I own. Too bad they stopped selling upgrade to CS6.

I have no intention to rent the software unless maybe they decide to rent by the day instead of month. I'd consider paying $1/day that I actually use the product.

DPREVIEW listed some of the other choices.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05...iting-programs

What format should we be saving our files in now. If you rent the software you better make sure that some other software can load the files when you stop renting the software.

[Benny Profane]

[kidwoo]

I don't know enough about software alternatives to answer that question, but I'm sure there's something on the market... right? Maybe this is an opportunity for their competition to step up and grab market share.

I, like Fuzz, use Lightroom for 99.9% of my editing so it doesn't affect me all that much. I don't care about having the most up-to-date version either.

Yeah well.......... There's this thing called after effects. Nothing exists that even touches it. Nothing exists that even nods in its general direction.

Photoshop is badass but that one can be replaced (and will be soon). AE is a whole other ball game.

And I'm hoarding my CS6 version like a motherfucker now.

[systemoverblow'd]

Yeah well.......... There's this thing called after effects. Nothing exists that even touches it. Nothing exists that even nods in its general direction.

LOL... WUT?

Someone has never heard of Autodesk.

Maybe something doesn't exist in its price-point, but things waaayyyy better than AE exist. And I use AE on a daily basis unfortunately.

[kidwoo]

LOL... WUT?

Someone has never heard of Autodesk.

Maybe something doesn't exist in its price-point, but things waaayyyy better than AE exist. And I use AE on a daily basis unfortunately.

I've heard of it. And when I looked at it there wasn't nearly the timelapse capacity. AE is just soooo eaaaazzzyyy


Isn't that like production design software primarily? IE: modeling buildings

[systemoverblow'd]

Autodesk has many options. Smoke for heavy editing, Flame for compositing, Maya/3ds max for 3d modeling/animation, etc.

I think with FCP taking a steaming shit on our chest that is what we'll move to. That or Avid, but I hate Avid. After Effects will still be our go to compositing app for the time being though as I most comfortable with it. But I could make the big bucks just knowing how to use Smoke/Flame. Dabbled with it when I worked for BorisFX when it was UNIX based and you needed an SGI to run it, but now that the software is available on OS X, we might have to take the plunge.

[kidwoo]

Yeah get that shit dialed.

I'm going to have some questions in a few years

[stuckathuntermtn]

Expensive pricing model for the end user, but some of you are fucking retarded. You don't own the software. You never own the software. You own a software license. so this is Adobe's way of cutting down on piracy, reselling disks (the license), and making more money.

Oh, and OSX IS a Unix dristro, basically.

[systemoverblow'd]

Oh, and OSX IS a Unix dristro, basically.

No shit sherlock. That was why it was so easy to port to OS X. But before you had to buy it on an SGI as a turnkey solution. There was no way around it. Same with avid (turnkey, not SGI). That's why FCP became so popular because for once, anyone could afford to edit powerfully on the cheap.

[Fuzz]

Expensive pricing model for the end user, but some of you are fucking retarded. You don't own the software. You never own the software. You own a software license. so this is Adobe's way of cutting down on piracy, reselling disks (the license), and making more money.

No, you're the one arguing semantics and missing the point. Yes, we do not own the software in the legal sense, just like we do not legally own the movies we buy on DVDs, or the music we buy on CD or iTunes, or the books we buy at Barnes & Noble or Amazon, or the art we buy at galleries/shops. But in all cases, we own (in the non-legal sense) a copy of the work that we get to keep. New Line Cinemas is not going to come knocking on my door asking for my Lord of The Rings Blu-Ray back because I stopped paying a monthly fee. With all of this content, I can choose to pay a low recurring fee and rent it for a while (e.g. RedBox or Netflix, Pandora or Spotify, etc.), or pay a larger amount upfront and just buy a copy outright for myself. If both options were available, it wouldn't be a problem. What Adobe is doing is similar to the content owners (movie studios, recording companies, publishers, artists) saying that unless you pay a monthly fee, you have to return the work -- no more buying and "owning" a DVD, a book, a song, or a painting.

Yes, Adobe is free to do whatever they want and to change their licensing agreement (from current "ownership" to pure rental) to make more money. And I'm free to bitch about how I do not want other content also going in the same direction.