Just Cancelled Photoshop

[wiltw]

I can. Because developers also need to pay their rent.

If every single piece of software was free, who would finance it?

If the company improves their software, they entice users to seek a license to obtain and to use the new software. The same as Adobe did before LR7...I did not skip any new releases of LR because I saw value in each release. Oddly, once they started the monhly mandated expense for the consumer, I no longer found any of the new features they put into each of the three later releases to be of any value, giving me no reason to pay every month for nothing.

 

[Robert Maxey]

What about a BIOS as a service?! or video card graphics software as a service?!

Not a service. My laptop has a BIOS as well as a video driver. I do not pay a monthly fee for either.

Bob.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

What about a BIOS as a service?! or video card graphics software as a service?!

 

[Robert Maxey]

Here at the university, our curriculum uses mainstream software like Adobe Creative cloud and Autodesk Maya. They want to teach student using "Industry standard" software and it's on all the lab computer's. The faculty rarely mentions open source software. I don't know the reason why. If I were a student, I'd go for the free software.

It would seem to me that using industry standard software would help the student when he or she starts looking for a job. I understand that.

Open Source software is getting better. I mean I can find a new version of the old Palm Desktop, after all these years. Lot to be said for FOSS. It comes as no surprise your faculty rarely mentions open source software.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

If the company improves their software, they entice users to seek a license to obtain and to use the new software. The same as Adobe did before LR7.

And that is how it should be. No problem with that.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

Here at the university, our curriculum uses mainstream software like Adobe Creative cloud and Autodesk Maya. They want to teach student using "Industry standard" software and it's on all the lab computer's. The faculty rarely mentions open source software. I don't know the reason why. If I were a student, I'd go for the free software.

I should have added this about FOSS/PS: I have read up on the more than 50 applications sold by Adobe and my guess is no open source software page or combination of packages can match this fantastically huge collection of features. I am also given to understand that every Adobe (or most, perhaps?) are intimately tied together in a seamless fashion.

In short, Linux cannot compete overall. We can in some cases. I use Inkscape and GIMP and they meet my needs. For now.

Bob

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I should have added this about FOSS/PS: I have read up on the more than 50 applications sold by Adobe and my guess is no open source software page or combination of packages can match this fantastically huge collection of features. I am also given to understand that every Adobe (or most, perhaps?) are intimately tied together in a seamless fashion.

In short, Linux cannot compete overall. We can in some cases. I use Inkscape and GIMP and they meet my needs. For now.

Bob

That's great. Just use what ever tool that does the job. Some people want their software that does everything even though the use doesn't use every feature. I've used Photoshop since version 2.5 and I've seen a lot of cool features added. My use is limited, but there are a few new features that discovered and used. But over, this feature creep forces me to relearn new menu items. I only use PS because the university pays for it. When I retire, I will use something else to edit my images since photography will be just a hobby. I don't think getting subscribing to Adobe Creative Cloud is worth it because photography is just a hobby.

 

[Robert Maxey]

I believe the subscription model came as a result of widespread bootlegging and stolen software. These are very powerful, sophisticated and complex programs that took time to develop and continue to improve. Adobe does deserve to make money from it. Not that long ago, it took a $150,000 (1980's dollars, too!) computer system in a climate-controlled room, with dedicated software to do 1/10 of what Photoshop can do today on your desktop.

Very well could be a part of the reason. My guess, however, is PS can be easily upgraded and new features are in the user's hands quickly.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

That's great. Just use what ever tool that does the job.

One of the first things I do when upgrading my office suite is remove almost every tool bar button, menu item and every right-click context command. I then add a few lesser used commands. i find I never use the features I thought i might find value in.

I say, do what works for you.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

I understand the concerns of many here, but, for me, the subscription model works well. Retail Photoshop used to go for $500 or so with expensive upgrades. I used to use Photoshop Express. With annual updates, I was paying what I now pay for full Photoshop and get online storage and Lightroom in addition.

So tell me ... what happens if your subscription runs out. Can you DL your files?

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

PhotoLine has what I need for image editing at a very reasonable price, without any subscription. www.pl32.com

I downloaded it again, and it looks nice. Rather slow because I am running it under Wine. Would not run last month.

Thanks for the link.

Bob

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Open Source software is getting better. I mean I can find a new version of the old Palm Desktop, after all these years. Lot to be said for FOSS. It comes as no surprise your faculty rarely mentions open source software.

I moved from being virtually 100% Mac OS centric, to about 80% Linux / 20% Mac last year. Aside from a couple of early hiccups, my experience using Linux as a desktop OS has been very positive. In terms of photography, PhotoLine works well under 'Wine' and VueScan is Linux native.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Rather slow because I am running it under Wine. Would not run last month.

Interesting as I suffer from no slowness under Wine.

 

[wiltw]

I believe the subscription model came as a result of widespread bootlegging and stolen software.

When Lightroom was distributed by DVD, each DVD package had a 16-alpha/numeric license key code...a unitque identifier. The software was licensed to ONE individual who registered that key with Adobe. When my PC broke, I could use the same DVD and key to load Lightroom onto a new PC, plain and simple.
An internet distributed license could do the same...buy the license, register it online, get a uniqued key number to that licensee...and then Adobe could append a legitimate 4-digita authentication code issued by Adobe So then Adobe could readily identify the legitimate user to one copy of the license, even if the user changed PCs; the burden on the user could be placed under is to notify Adobe that the license is transererred to a new PC and Adobed would issue a new 4-digit authentication code for that new PC. If Adobe permitted two PCs to have the same licence, it could merely append 'a' or 'b' at the end of the 4-digita authentication number issued by them. Using this technique, if I leg my best friend load software and use my key, it would not word because it did not have a legitimate authentoication code assign...stopping unauthorized copies from running on dozens of PCs.
A commercial licensee would pay a higher fee than an individual, but each PC has to have an authentication code which is 5-digit or 6-digita, for corporations with lots of users who use one commercial license.
There ARE ways of protecting against unauthorized unpaid usage, without resorting to a monthly fee...that was purely an issue of revenue growth.

 

[Robert Maxey]

Interesting as I suffer from no slowness under Wine.

Some software runs fast, with no noticeable slowdown. Other software runs slow, but not painfully slow. Stuff i installed today seems to be ok.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

I moved from being virtually 100% Mac OS centric, to about 80% Linux / 20% Mac last year. Aside from a couple of early hiccups, my experience using Linux as a desktop OS has been very positive. In terms of photography, PhotoLine works well under 'Wine' and VueScan is Linux native.

I am rethinking things. I decided to go with a new Mac for two reasons: Bloody fast and the M1chip. Currently, i print labels on an old printer running DOS (ask your grandpa) and a couple of old Linux laptops and a Windows box for music and large files. More of a NAS kludge than anything else. I want one computer to do fifty different things rather than a handful of computers that 9 things less efficiently.

Bob

 

[RDW]

So then Adobe could readily identify the legitimate user to one copy of the license, even if the user changed PCs; the burden on the user could be placed under is to notify Adobe that the license is transererred to a new PC and Adobed would issue a new 4-digit authentication code for that new PC. If Adobe permitted two PCs to have the same licence, it could merely append 'a' or 'b' at the end of the 4-digita authentication number issued by them.

Something like this already exists in Creative Suite, the previous 'perpetual' licence versions of Photoshop, etc. I think it was also added to Lightroom in version 6. The installation key alone isn't sufficient - you also have to activate your copy online, and Adobe keeps count of the number of active installations (usually limited to 2). So I don't think the piracy argument holds up, especially as the pirates quickly found ways to get around Creative Cloud activation. It's much more about Adobe believing (correctly) that they can make a lot more money from subscriptions.

One major problem with the old Creative Suite activation is that you are completely dependent on Adobe's willingness to continue supporting online activation of your version. And it turns out that Adobe can't be trusted about this. They have now switched off the activation servers for CS-CS4, so you can no longer activate anything earlier than CS5, even if you have the disks. For a while, they made special versions of CS2 and CS3 available to customers that didn't require online activation, but they've now stopped doing this, and didn't bother for CS4 (expensive software they were still selling in 2010). In the next few years they will almost certainly do the same to CS5 and CS6, so Creative Suite versions of Photoshop will be killed off altogether and there will only be Creative Cloud rentals. Those old licences aren't so 'perpetual' after all, it seems. LR6 will presumably go the same way, but I don't think earlier versions require activation.

Affinity Photo, incidentally, has a traditional licence key that doesn't require online activation or limit the number of installations, at least if you buy the software directly from their website. So you'll be able to use it as long as you have a compatible computer.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

When Lightroom was distributed by DVD, each DVD package had a 16-alpha/numeric license key code...a unitque identifier. The software was licensed to ONE individual who registered that key with Adobe. When my PC broke, I could use the same DVD and key to load Lightroom onto a new PC, plain and simple....

...

There ARE ways of protecting against unauthorized unpaid usage, without resorting to a monthly fee...that was purely an issue of revenue growth.

Adobe has made additional billions and billions when they changed their business model and went to CC. So everyone who uses it is paying loads more than they did before. It's simple arithmetic. Their additional profits belie arguments by many that it costs the same as it did before. That's just wishful thinking.

 

[Auer]

Renting the Creative Suite on a Windows or Apple box is like leasing a car.

Its simple and convenient.

I have no interest in wasting my time on Linux or fretting over $10/month.
I prefer to focus on my photography.

This thread reminded me that I havent tought about my subscription in many months. And I prefer it that way.
It comes out of my PayPal account, and I just happily use a product that suits my needs perfectly for less than 2 rolls of Fomapan a month.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Renting the Creative Suite on a Windows or Apple box is like leasing a car.
Its simple and convenient.
I have no interest in wasting my time on Linux or fretting over $10/month.
I prefer to focus on my photography.

This thread reminded me that I havent tought about my subscription in many months. And I prefer it that way.
It comes out of my PayPal account, and I just happily use a product that suits my needs perfectly for less than 2 rolls of Fomapan a month.

I wonder how this might work with wives?

 

[Frank53]

Renting the Creative Suite on a Windows or Apple box is like leasing a car.

Its simple and convenient.

I have no interest in wasting my time on Linux or fretting over $10/month.
I prefer to focus on my photography.

This thread reminded me that I havent tought about my subscription in many months. And I prefer it that way.
It comes out of my PayPal account, and I just happily use a product that suits my needs perfectly for less than 2 rolls of Fomapan a month.

+1
I pay a yearly fee and forget about it during the next 11 months.
Beside that I use the Nik software, which is imho the best photosoftware there is and it works flawlessly with Adobe.
Regards,
Frank

 

[Auer]

I wonder how this might work with wives?

If you have more than one then all bets are off.

 

[Photowithfries]

I guess he means that Adobe was under cyber attack and he could not log in. Although the online version has it's charms if you are concerned about being locked out just buy the disk version.

Can you still buy a disk version??? All I have heard is that you can now only rent. If you upgrade your operating system it seams that you have to rent photoshop. This is Bad news for photographers who have to absorb high equipment and other costs to begin with.

 

[Photowithfries]

Well one no longer owns a copy of Photo$hop, one rents it.

This is a real problem created by adobe that needs to be fixed. What if a self employed photographer needs to have a job delivered "in the morning" but "is no longer competitive" because of dependance on a rental product that only works part of the time since it has been a Rental? What if adobe covers the losses on that job, or on the loss of that client? Would that not be fair?

 

[btaylor]

Can you still buy a disk version??? All I have heard is that you can now only rent. If you upgrade your operating system it seams that you have to rent photoshop. This is Bad news for photographers who have to absorb high equipment and other costs to begin with.

Instead of absorbing the high initial cost of an outright purchase? Of course in the long run it costs more, just in smaller chunks. All the software companies we deal with at work have migrated over to a subscription model. Our yearly costs for these subscriptions have gone through the roof, and there’s nothing I can do about it except raise prices.