New Adobe CC Software Will Require Current OS

[nmp]

The moment Adobe offered CC I bought all of the Adobe programs I would need for photography, videos and publishing that were on disks before they became unavailable. Because I work erratically in spurts, cC just doesn’t make economic sense. Some Adobe products have become improved with more and more features that sometimes their core reason for being seems to get lost. I wish I could still use Pagemaker rather than InDesign.

The problem with this is you never know when your standalone software becomes incompatible...new operating system, new computer, new camera etc. That is the risk of paying the lump sum cost of all your software in advance and then see it go obsolete in a few years. The whole software industry is going in the direction of subscription model - for one thing it is foolproof protection against piracy (so I understand.) Soon we won't have a choice. Even people who are selling licensed software like Capture One, there is no guarantee that they would not move to subscription model, stopping upgrades of legacy software leaving you holding the bag.

Just my opinion....

 

[removed account4]

The problem with this is you never know when your standalone software becomes incompatible...new operating system, new computer, new camera etc. That is the risk of paying the lump sum cost of all your software in advance and then see it go obsolete in a few years. The whole software industry is going in the direction of subscription model - for one thing it is foolproof protection against piracy (so I understand.) Soon we won't have a choice. Even people who are selling licensed software like Capture One, there is no guarantee that they would not move to subscription model, stopping upgrades of legacy software leaving you holding the bag.

yup that was the problem i had the adobe program i bought doesn't work on my newer ( 6? year old ) mac
and i used to swap images via ethernet cables but with an update about a year ago
the newer computer wasnt' recognized by the older one and most of my images are from a scan so it ended up
a real PITA to scan on one computer and use some sort of memory device to transfer back and forth, so i opted to
use the IDK 10$/mo subscription .. remembering what the "new version" bought outright a handful of years ago
even after a year i haven't paid more than a fraction of what it cost ... ( i upgraded from adobe "lite" to cs2 for $50
and in a little over a year i haven't even paid as much as i did for the lite version and the upgrade combined )
and hopefully the computer i am using now will stay up to date enough for another year or 2 ... my scanner will
probably die ( its almost 15 years old ) before my computer isnt' compatible with the software ...

 

[guangong]

My son in law builds and maintains my computers so hopefully he will be able to maintain their obsolescence.

 

[RattyMouse]

The problem with this is you never know when your standalone software becomes incompatible...new operating system, new computer, new camera etc. That is the risk of paying the lump sum cost of all your software in advance and then see it go obsolete in a few years. The whole software industry is going in the direction of subscription model - for one thing it is foolproof protection against piracy (so I understand.) Soon we won't have a choice. Even people who are selling licensed software like Capture One, there is no guarantee that they would not move to subscription model, stopping upgrades of legacy software leaving you holding the bag.

Just my opinion....

Not a problem at all. When software is current, as it was when he bought the software, you are certain to get years and years out of the programs. I bought Lightroom 5 FIVE years ago and just installed it on a brand new Mac. I easily have many more years left with it. I paid all of $79 for Lightroom 5. I'll probably end up paying $10 per YEAR of ownership. That is why Adobe now forces people to pay for software for the rest of their lives. In perpetuity.

By the way, piracy is still alive and well. I see pirated Adobe software for sale all over Asia when I travel.

You can try to justify paying to rent software in perpetuity, but the logic is very weak. Not at all compelling.

 

[removed account4]

the older versions don't work on a newer machine.
why does it matter if you can get an older version ( which is free from what i understand on the adobe website )?
the bootleg / piracy market is why they adopted the pay to play model
( and to make it easier for people to update ... )
its too bad, it kind of ruins it for everyone.

 

[faberryman]

You can try to justify paying to rent software in perpetuity, but the logic is very weak. Not at all compelling.

I understand where you are coming from. I still use Word/Excel from Office 2003 because they do everything I need. I am not a power user. It is the same with image software. For some, LR5/PS5 is sufficient.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Another alternative to PShop/Lightroom is Affinity Photo. It's $50, and runs on a tablet or a desktop. A friend of mine swears by it for his day-to-day image editing work, and his job is digital imaging specialist at Texas State University.

 

[nmp]

Not a problem at all. When software is current, as it was when he bought the software, you are certain to get years and years out of the programs. I bought Lightroom 5 FIVE years ago and just installed it on a brand new Mac. I easily have many more years left with it. I paid all of $79 for Lightroom 5. I'll probably end up paying $10 per YEAR of ownership. That is why Adobe now forces people to pay for software for the rest of their lives. In perpetuity.

By the way, piracy is still alive and well. I see pirated Adobe software for sale all over Asia when I travel.

You can try to justify paying to rent software in perpetuity, but the logic is very weak. Not at all compelling.

I guess it does depend on your particular usage and circumstances. I don't use Lightroom at all, only ACR and Photoshop. $9.99/month probably not justified if only using Lightroom. Incidentally, I also have Lightroom 5 that I bought but barely used. For me the CC takes out all headaches associated with software maintenance and keeping up with latest and greatest. For that I am willing to pay a little extra over a long period of time. The price so far is affordable and I hope I am grandfathered into perpetuity for the same price (wishful, probably.)

Prior to CC, I had CS2 and I would have had to pay for the full price if I wanted to get the CS6 which was some $500, if I remember correctly. That or pay $9.99 for a month for CC. And the choice was easy for me.

Again. to each his/her own....

:Niranjan.

 

[RattyMouse]

the older versions don't work on a newer machine.

Nonsense. I just installed Lightroom 5 on a brand new iMac. Works fine.

 

[removed account4]

Another alternative to PShop/Lightroom is Affinity Photo. It's $50, and runs on a tablet or a desktop. A friend of mine swears by it for his day-to-day image editing work, and his job is digital imaging specialist at Texas State University.

hi scott
i used afinity for a little bit ( trial period ) but when i had questions and they couldn't be answered via helpforum
and then i called and the customer service people were less than customer service oriented .. i opted out .
it was a pretty nice program though if i ever go broke i might get it or pixelmator which is also supposed to be great.

 

[removed account4]

Nonsense. I just installed Lightroom 5 on a brand new iMac. Works fine.

does cs2 work on an intel chip mac? i tried and i don't think
it worked, otherwise i would be using THAT instead of paying 10/month
i wasn't talking about lightroom .. i've never used light room because i use color channels and i don't think it is part of the system...

 

[jtk]

Most of this relates to how seriously one needs/uses a computer. I've been heavily involved for decades, made most of my living with Win since I dumped Mac for Win98...one MS system gently and repeatedly morphed into another .. Nearly zero grief. Plenty of important software never has worked on Mac , which is a joke for significant research and client relationship management... makes PC the only game in town for most non-hobbiests. Even if Mac was a competitor it'd be absurd to run two OS. The big game is Photoshop. Alternatives may be fun, but who want's to keep up with them. On top of all that, both Adobe and Win have incredibly effective online support.

 

[wyofilm]

Another alternative to PShop/Lightroom is Affinity Photo. It's $50, and runs on a tablet or a desktop. A friend of mine swears by it for his day-to-day image editing work, and his job is digital imaging specialist at Texas State University.

I've been running Affinity for a little while and it does what I need. The price is right.

 

[Sean]

I don't do enough digital stuff to warrant adobe licenses so found an OSX app called "Acorn"
http://flyingmeat.com/acorn

It's a pretty close clone of Photoshop and I've gotten used to it. It's actually on sale for $15 and has a trial (not affiliated, I just use it).

 

[jtk]

One reason to use PS rather than cheap alts, not mentioned earlier, is that it's the gold standard for professional photographers...useful in discussion with peers.

I use PS with NIK...Lightroom does a good job of organizing files, and I did use it before I got confident with PS basics, but NIK is a joy. I do "own" NIK (was free from Google), which may have to be replaced eventually because Google doesn't "support" it any more. I'll probably be happy to pay for that..it's wonderful.

Having spent over two decades paying for and struggling with updates of professional software It's a pleasure to delete that stuff and have Adobe and Win update themselves. An aside, I had virtually no trouble updating Win when I had to do it..am very happy with Win 10.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I get on well with PhotoLine which works very well for me and is compatible with the 'ColorPerfect' plug-in software I use for processing film scans.

https://www.pl32.com

 

[Sirius Glass]

The latest OS gives the most protection from hackers and virii [plural: virus], so get over it and keep your OS current.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Well, this is bad news. Adobe released the following statement:

"To take advantage of the latest operating system features and technologies, the next major release of Creative Cloud will not support Windows 8.1, Windows 10 v1511 and v1607, and Mac OS 10.11 (El Capitan)."

I do most of my editing on a Mac with the current operating system, but when I travel I use my IBM Windows laptop running 8.1, which will no longer be supported. Looks like I'll have to upgrade Windows. Not happy about needing to spend $200 or so to maintain compatibility. A new computer with Windows 10 included may be the better long term investment. Or move to a Mac laptop. I am obtuse enough to like the TrackPoint though.

An alternative may be to ditch Adobe CC and embrace Capture One. I liked what I saw with it at the Photrio Symposium. Only downside is that it doesn't support the Fuji GFX which I have been mulling over.

Digital can be a puzzle sometimes. Film is simple in comparison. I guess that is the attraction for some.

staying up to date is a constant ping-pong between updating hardware and software,I'm sure it's designed that way to keep us spending money.

 

[mschulz]

staying up to date is a constant ping-pong between updating hardware and software,I'm sure it's designed that way to keep us spending money.

You are right. How dare these people make a living by building products with new and updated features while also getting paid to support the old ones. Pathetic.

 

[ME Super]

Me personally, I never jumped on the Adobe train. The image manipulation software I use is called GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program). GNU means "GNU's Not Unix" - a recursive acronym. GIMP is Free software (both "freedom" and "free beer") which means if you're so-inclined, you can acquire the source code for it, make changes to it, and distribute the changes to others, so long as you distribute them under the same license as the original, unmodified source code was made available to you. That's the "freedom" part of it. The "free beer" part means, well, it's no-cost except for what you pay your ISP to be able to download it.

Imagine that, photo editing software that's easy on the wallet! Maybe it doesn't do everything that Photoshop or Lightroom can do, but it does what I need it to so far, and ... Did I mention, it's free?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I too use GIMP because I do not need all the features of Photoshop.

 

[faberryman]

staying up to date is a constant ping-pong between updating hardware and software,I'm sure it's designed that way to keep us spending money.

Adobe Lightroom's new Enhance Details won't run on my laptop because I am not using Windows 10. Enhance Details will run on my 2011 Mac Mini desktop, but takes 6 minutes per image. If I updated, either of my computers to something current, Enhance Detains would run in seconds. I haven't decided what to do, but any way you look at it, it is my choice. These decisions are simple cost benefit analysis; not a conspiracy between software and hardware companies.

 

[wiltw]

Microsoft now calls Windows a service rather than a product. The next versions will be Microsoft Managed Desktop - yes, you will pay Microsoft to manage your computer and you will pay them monthLy to do it.
The day of the desktop computer is almost gone.

I use Capture One and like it a lot.

Oh great, Windows is being Adobe'd with the perpetual payments!

 

[wiltw]

I am one of those that pay monthly. Looking at it another way, taking it over 5 years the total sum is less than when you could buy a new full version disc before the CC version came along. Yes I will agree it isn't cheap but what is these days? I have not had any notification from adobe of any change in operating system and I get regular updates from Microsoft so I can only assume that my version of Windows 10 is up to date.

Folks need to be AWARE

$10 per month, $120 per year, 40 years totals = $4800
If you instead put the $10 in a bank and got 5% annualized, with interest compounding monthly (not daily compounding like banks calculate for savings accounts), interest accumulation would have resulted in $10524 increase in account value over the 40 years.
Ergo, your bank account would be $15334 at the end of 40 years (to be clear, by spending the $10 each month rather than putting that into an account offering 5% growth rate, you do not have an accumulation of $15334 in wealth
​

Just be AWARE, and make an intelligent decision for YOURSELF!
I am trying to convert no one to MY point of view. I am showing true 'cost', not the apparent one "It's only nnn"

So if there is an alternate way of accomplishing the same results without payment of a monthly subscription, you will be $15k richer in the end.

 

[faberryman]

Folks need to be AWARE

$10 per month, $120 per year, 40 years totals = $4800
If you instead put the $10 in a bank and got 5% annualized, with interest compounding monthly (not daily compounding like banks calculate for savings accounts), interest accumulation would have resulted in $10524 increase in account value over the 40 years.
Ergo, your bank account would be $15334 at the end of 40 years (to be clear, by spending the $10 each month rather than putting that into an account offering 5% growth rate, you do not have an accumulation of $15334 in wealth
​

Just be AWARE, and make an intelligent decision for YOURSELF!
I am trying to convert no one to MY point of view. I am showing true 'cost', not the apparent one "It's only nnn"

So if there is an alternate way of accomplishing the same results without payment of a monthly subscription, you will be $15k richer in the end.

What a great reason not to wash your socks. Think of all those quarters going down the drain.