Adobe Creative Suite Going Subscription Based

jpeezay

Fully agree with Ton and PB_PM. I personally think it's just postponing the innevitable. If you look at the hardware, you will find that progressively more and more laptops are being made each year without an internal DVD/BD drive installed, and I think this trend will continue. Look at the growth of tablets... Even IF you buy a CD version these days, you often open up the setup pogram only to have the computer log on to the internet and perform the installation that way. With corporate software licences, it's basically the same business model or supplier/vendor relationship, so Adobe is just extending this to the "private" users as well. I also think they don't really care about the minority of users that buy a version once in a blue moon, and for the others, it's really not a big change at all and less hassle. So everyone wins, except for us "dead beats" that don't like buying a full version and software package every time something is updated.

I am doing everything I can to try to avoid having anything on the "cloud". That is why I just bought a home network attached storage device to use as a private server (" home cloud"). This decision was quite easy to make after I have read the "terms and conditions" on a couple of the "cloud" offers. Having read JJ_SO's post, I think those are some really valid questions. But how many of us have "free online emails"? Again.. same thing... We're all in deeper than we think. On my iPhone 3g, I can no longer update ANYTHING because apple doesn't support it anymore. As such, I lost most of my apps. I can still phone and send text messages, but not much else. This is the real danger... it essentially forces you to keep purchasing hardware, as well as, sotware. Even IF you are happy with how slow your hardware is and how outdated your software is.

Regarding the whole "cloud" thing, I am not sure what the alternative would be. Should they have called it "monthly fees instead of one-time payments" verion? Putting the whole "cloud" terminology on it is a good marketing thing, and I know it works on some of my friends and colleagues.

Overall, I think there are some benefits and drawbacks, and just as with any "change", most people are sceptical or against it at first. In the end, everyone has an option. PS is not being forced on anyone. The thing that bothers me the most, is that being outside of North America, I have to pay more for the monthly fees. I think this is the part that's not fair. Unless I get a proxy server service and go through the extremely complicated (and potentially not fully legal) process of trying to get a credit card from another country, Adobe will always know where I am and charge me more as a result. It will be interesting to see whether and how the fee structure changes over the next short while (i.e. if people leave, they will have to drop the prices or potentially face lower revenues).

Alright... that's it for my long rant...

JJ_SO

...But how many of us have "free online emails"? Again.. same thing... We're all in deeper than we think. On my iPhone 3g, I can no longer update ANYTHING because apple doesn't support it anymore. As such, I lost most of my apps. I can still phone and send text messages, but not much else. This is the real danger... it essentially forces you to keep purchasing hardware, as well as, sotware. Even IF you are happy with how slow your hardware is and how outdated your software is...

I bought a lot of apps, movies and music in the iTunesStore, as it's convenient. For that I have a German iTS account. Living in Switzerland since five years, I had to tell my German bank my new address and am paying now and then with a German credit card, registered to a Swiss address.

After changing the hard drive of my iMac, which is not the boot drive, I needed to type in my password and confirm my credit card. No problem. Really? In Apple's stupid mask they need five digits for German postal code - Switzerland has only 4. That appears to be the end of being customer in the German iTS, which worked fine for five years, not anymore now.

In Europe we have a lot of different countries, people travel a lot and sometimes being abroad for a while is normal these days. Now, if you have to concern each time you go abroad and need your laptop for work, what will happen then? Or changing the bank account? These days (just recently) so many credit card data get stolen. I guess it's a pain in the ass when you have to finish a job, Adobe wants the monthly rate (reminds me a bit on protection fees to the Maf) and there's some trouble with your bank? That's just the difference of paying once or each month.

And I would really like to see the reaction of all of us, if Nikon would chip their hardware and bill also monthly. On the other side, there are leasing cars - but none of them forces you to get your next car from the same manufacturer.

With a newspaper you get each day fresh news, that's what you pay for. Do I want to pay for Adobe's work on "features" I hardly ever use? No matter how crappy they implemented it? No matter with which hardware they don't work? No matter which of my apps is eventually crashing because Adobe's greedy apps get every bit of RAM and keeps it, even after you're closing the file?

As another alternative to PS I'd like to mention PhotoLine32 (it's actually 64bit) for OS X and Windows, and Pixelmator was already mentioned. None of them can replace PS fully. But for most of my private work PS would be overdrive and those apps just work fine. Although the interface of PL32 is really close to digital stone age and some things are different.

paulr

Already getting the E-Mails in the Uk for Adobe A mere £46.88 per month Bargain ????/

ads

"If you figure they update their software every 2 years and divide that into a monthly cost of ownership -
CS = $1,700/24=$70/mth / PS = $600/24 = $25/mth"

Updates are $199 TTJ, not $600...

FlowtographyBerlin

As long as you NEVER buy another new camera. Unless Adobe agrees to supply new Camera Raw definitions to new cameras for at least CS6, the current cameras will be it.

I guess it is lucky that I now shoot Nikon so I have the great D800 and D800E. Maybe now IS a good time to stop buying new cameras since Photoshop won't be there to support new cameras.

Not quite correct: They will update ACR to version 8 for existing CS6 customers. But that's the last update for CS6.

@TaoTeJared: I think you're right about the pricing, I don't understand how so many people complain about it. Nevertheless, if you switch, you're basically signing up for something you don't know about (what's the pricing in the future, plus some of the questions @kampa brought up) – with the major issue being that should you not be ok with their ideas, you will plain lose the product with NO alternative (no old versions to buy used etc.).

The one-sided take-it-or-leave-it approach is what really bugs me here, not much else, actually.

I worked by IBM for 25 years, the cloud was called mainframe at that time, your PC will become just a terminal, you don't know where your files are and you only can do what they put on that mainframe. Nobody has a good workflow for this environment and you will be very limited.

This is turning the clock 40 years back.

As it was mentioned before, the term Cloud is not correct in this product, as it's still the standard locally installed software, plus you get some cloud storage.

Regarding the whole "cloud" thing, I am not sure what the alternative would be. Should they have called it "monthly fees instead of one-time payments" verion? Putting the whole "cloud" terminology on it is a good marketing thing, and I know it works on some of my friends and colleagues.

If Adobe were precise with their naming, they should call it Creative Suite RENT.

Ironheart

If they called it Creative Suite Lease, it's nickname would be Creative Suite Fleece

TaoTeJared

"If you figure they update their software every 2 years and divide that into a monthly cost of ownership -
CS = $1,700/24=$70/mth / PS = $600/24 = $25/mth"

Updates are $199 TTJ, not $600...

Yep sorry I didn't include a line for just the upgrade - most seem not to even own a current version and I looked past it.
$199/24=$8.30/mth - That is the one part I don't like much but the ability to have a few more titles makes up for it. In the past I have generally skipped 1 release or actually have used student versions (You have to love friends whose kids work in the student computer shops!) He graduated so I have to buy a full version and bite the bullet anyway so I could care less.

How exactly Adobe going to a monthly fee model somehow relates to everything else in your life you hate - I don't get it and it really has nothing to do with this thread.

As others have said, 5 years from now, this will be the pricing model for almost every software title out there. Suck it up and deal with it. This perceived idea of choice has been a cloud of smoke for years. Like it or not, Adobe is the best piece of software because it bought out all the rest of the players. Corel bought the "just ok" editing software leftovers and we have been stuck with them for what, 15 years now? New titles come, get sued for patent infringement, and go bankrupt since those two own almost every patent. We have been stuck with them, (and it's not all bad as they are amazing software - especially true if you were editing photos 15 years ago) and we have to deal with the change that they have too. If Adobe announced price increases of 20%, 30%, 50%, the same people would be bitching about it and saying how they would go to another title and this thread would be no different.

Benji2505

I look at it from a positive angle: it brings back competition in this quasi-monopoly market sector. It gives the competing products a shot in the arm...

I hope Google will update the NIK package to PS standard and maybe even launch a standalone version. That will be the day I go short adobe.

ads

"That is the one part I don't like much but the ability to have a few more titles makes up for it"

Only if you want more titles TTJ. For everyone else after the intial purchase it has effctively tripled the cost of every upgrade cycle, and you are forced to pay whether you want/need the upgrade or not.

Adobe can increase the price any time they want - they have you well and truly over a barrel, and are under zero pressure to make new features compelling enough to get people to upgrade voluntarily.

Its a great deal for Adobe, a lousy one for users. Ironic when Adobe first became big as a company because Quark got greedy with their licence terms and Adobe came up with an alternative.

Glad I bought CS6 when I did...

Ade

Adobe is not forcing anyone to pay for anything.

- There are many competitor software which can read PSD files, including free ones (like GIMP).

- Adobe is working on alternatives to ensure that you still have access to your files even after your subscription lapses. E.g., when the subscription lapses, Photoshop CC might still work in "limited" mode allowing you to open & view your PSD files, export them to a different format like TIFF, etc.

- Photoshop is not Creative Suite, and Creative Suite is not Photoshop. The majority of pro Creative Suite customers are not photographers. Most use multiple Adobe apps and the cloud subscription model makes sense to them. Adobe will have over 1 million Creative Cloud customers within a year. The clock is not turning back.

- It's possible that Adobe will introduce a Creative Cloud package specifically for photographers. E.g., give you only access to LR + PS at a lower price point. It's an option they're openly considering.

ads

"It's possible that Adobe will introduce a Creative Cloud package specifically for photographers. E.g., give you only access to LR + PS at a lower price point. It's an option they're openly considering."

The cost for photoshop only is already more than the ongoing cost of PS + LR.

Ade

Hence the phrase "at a lower price point".

For $19/mo what you get is the "Extended" version of Photoshop, with advanced 3D features, image measurement and analysis tools, DICOM support for medical imaging, etc. These features are rarely needed by most photographers and perhaps could be limited in a lower priced option.

Frankly, I rather see Adobe focus on professional needs, and $19/month is a negligible cost of doing business.

ads

"19/month is a negligible cost of doing business."

Its still 2-3 times the current cost, you are surrendering control of one of the key tools of your business and not getting anything extra for your money - thats plain bad business for users.

TaoTeJared

I am not completely in love with the idea of what Adobe is currently planning - there are many things I'm not too happy about it and for one is the difference in "upgrade cost" vs the subscription. That is a big issue. I do hope they fix that and make a "Photographer" package and adjust their pricing to reflect a bit closer (or in my mind what it should be is a bit cheaper) to the current cost. I think they should allow people to also be able to buy box versions, and if the subscription ends, keep the software but not allowed to update it and pay a small premium to do so.

I laughed at Mike Gunter's comment really hard. I have had friends work for Adobe over the years and all left as soon as they could. They do seem to endorse a culture of arrogance, and make the word "epitome" seem too understated when used in conjunction with the phrase "corporate world." Makes me wonder how many "yes men" the executives have around them.

If you are going to make an argument against it, make a good argument - most so far (here and all over the web) are people who stomp their feet at everything that finally forces them to pay for something they haven't before, or drop into conspiracy theories how some super organization is trying to control them. I'm just amazed how worked up people are getting over this. I have seen this model coming for years - Adobe is just the first one to stick it's head out. Bad thing is their comments have a certain alikeness to the phrase "let them eat cake."

ads

"Surrendering control - No it's not. You are only over a barrel if you are unwilling to change"

Difference is if Adobe increases the price and I can't afford it/don't want to pay my software stops working - that's what I mean about control. Right now Photoshop works as long as I want to use it, Adobe has no control over how long I use it for, and can't demand cash from me to keep using CS6.

And its the other way around - Adobe only get the extra control if I do change...

"Throwing out $1,700/$850 in one shot is something that hurts."

Again TTJ the economics may be different if you want the whole suite if you only use Photoshop its nothing like that - I paid $380 for CS6 and LR4 boxed. Even full price from Adobe (if anyone still pays that) is $699.

You seem happy with the new licence terms and that's fine they may suit you, but they certainly aren't a better deal for everyone.

Look this is done, Adobe aren't gonna change their minds, just means less money from me in the future for upgrades, something Adobe wont lose sleep over.

NSXTypeR

Personally, as someone who does not depend on Adobe products but has seriously considered purchasing the, it really puts me off. This sort of pricing strategy is not conducive for hobbyists. Yes I know we make up a small fraction of Adobe's business but it really isn't a friendly practice for us at least.

JJ_SO

CS6 and also PS are not targeting hobbyist users. Just saying. For them the learning curve is really steep. Even professionals will never benefit of all the features and some of them are very unique.

mikep

well adobe is when it boils down to it a business, and their decisions are driven by $$$

software licenses are usually a one-time thing, but websites have often gone the subscription payment route ala lynda.com etc, so adobe is just migrating to this model.

i think for businesses its better to get customers paying regularly rather than one time in the long run, i wouldnt be surprised if this becomes more common.

i just watched this :

doesnt look particularly appealing to me anyway in the way of new features

even so, this will open the door for other companies to up their game and fill the gap adobe will leave, and maybe in a few years we will be saying adobe who?

i am sure apple have their beady eyes on adobe's market share and have already shown they can take it if they want with final cut .... (i just figure that apple dont really like adobe since they didnt support flash)

TaoTeJared

Adobe is here to stay - they are the "Last one standing" out of all the big boys. They either bought them or ran them out of business. Apple is not remotely competitive or ever will be in adobe's realm. Like it or not, Adobe is huge - and they are the standard in graphic design software and are going nowhere. Really when it comes down to it, no one else comes close to features or the refinement Adobe has.

CS6 and also PS are not targeting hobbyist users. Just saying. For them the learning curve is really steep. Even professionals will never benefit of all the features and some of them are very unique.

+1 that is worth saying again - Adobe CS/CC primary users are professionals and businesses.

[Deleted User]

Agreed with the professional primary users, but these users don't like frequent program changes. I know a couple of professional photographers who are still using PS4 and don't change there working workflow.

Ironheart

Professional photographers are not the primary professional users of PS. Graphic designers, illustrators, and others in the graphic arts, need to be able to interchange files, and work collaboratively. If you are two major revs behind, you are out of business. These professionals probably outnumber professional photographers 10 to 1 in terms of PS usage. If you switch the discussion to CS, it's probably closer to 100 to 1.

Rx4Photo

David Hobby of Strobist.com recently Tweeted (not that I follow Twitter) that he still uses CS3. Then again, most of his work is pure and clean straight out of camera type stuff.

flight3

Professional photographers are not the primary professional users of PS. Graphic designers, illustrators, and others in the graphic arts, need to be able to interchange files, and work collaboratively. If you are two major revs behind, you are out of business. These professionals probably outnumber professional photographers 10 to 1 in terms of PS usage. If you switch the discussion to CS, it's probably closer to 100 to 1.

I can attest that many Graphic Designers (myself included) don't upgrade every year...it isn't cost effective, and the yearly updates aren't that different. I use CS5 right now, and don't plan on upgrading until CS7 or CS8...but with this "leasing" plan, I might look into other options.

TaoTeJared

Professional photographers are not the primary professional users of PS.

Just a Note - None of us have said professional "photographers" - just professionals. Leaving it at professionals encompuses all groups. Photographers are probably one of the smallest subdivision groups of users. Very few non pros I know have Photoshop.

TaoTeJared

David Hobby of Strobist.com recently Tweeted (not that I follow Twitter) that he still uses CS3. Then again, most of his work is pure and clean straight out of camera type stuff.

I'm not surprised by that, and usually hear people using 1-2 versions back. With the advent of Lightroom and other "developing" software it did replace photoshop for all basic edits. I now use LR and Nik software for 90% of my photo work. For the vast majority of what I shoot, Lightroom covers my edit needs. I still have a need for it, but it is not open very often.