-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
I don't use the cloud storage, I always save locally.
I'm not sure exactly what your point is if Adobe goes broke or cuts me off, or whatever. When I purchased one of the creative suites, I would be in exactly the same situation as the cloud. Both do license checks, so if something like you are describing happens, the problem would surface not only with the "cloud" but all the previous version of adobe software out there also that were purchased and people have cds of. So, whether you have the cloud software or a cd, you'd be in the same boat if adobe goes out of business.
I believe you are thinking of "cloud software" as you need an internet connection to run the applications. You only need an internet connection to install the software. Not sure how often the license checks are done, so I imagine once in a while you need to connect to the internet, but that would be the same with either the cloud software or whether you installed from a cd.
So, I'm not sure why you are all worried all of a sudden with something called "cloud software" from adobe. It's just a name, you download the software, install it on your computer rather than a cd or dvd. Cloud is really an inaccurate description.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
I am currently working with a client who has a customer requiring re-worked digital interactive versions of their print products. For the most part it's about re-purposing those assets and making them work digitally and making them interact and animate. The assets are available in various forms - Illustrator files, PDF, InDesign or Photoshop format.
In the past I have used Xara for creating new artwork, and as we all know it works well. I found that when I tried to work with clients and use Xara to read assets from Adobe products, the result is far from perfect - either it doesn't support the latest version, or it rasterises content that I want to be vector, or it just doesn't read the format at all. Worse still is the reverse trip - Xara back to client.
For anyone collaborating with anyone in the commercial design world Xara is far from ideal. I realised that to work with these clients I had to be using the same software they use.
This means I have to shell out quite a lot of money to be able to work with those clients, and with a subscription model, I am a hamster on the Adobe wheel.
Virtually all of the commercial design world is sailing together in the Adobe boat. It's not a perfect boat, but we're all together, networking and doing business together. Xara users are in a much more finely tuned boat alongside. It's faster, smaller and cheaper, but not so many on-board, and certainly not so many with the same budgets as those sailing on the Adobe ship.
Being on the ship costs money. In my case, something like $50 or so a month. Ouch you say, and I agree, but then it's an enabler to allow me to work with clients who have budgets that are higher - currently hundreds of dollars to thousands of dollars for a job, so the subscription fee for Adobe cloud is just the cost of doing business with these clients - an overhead. The benefit of working with these clients far outweighs the cost of the Adobe subscription.
If Adobe sinks the boat, we're all in it together and we'll either sink or swim to another boat. It would be the same for Microsoft, or Apple.
I'd like the choice of buying product permanently, as opposed to licensing, but there are definite benefits to a subscription model as well as downsides.
Back to these Adobe clients. They won't be bothered too much about the subscription model. They have thousands of dollars being generated off the back of Adobe software so they won't care how they pay for it provided it helps them make money. The subscription model can actually help them - variable numbers of Adobe seats for temporary staff - that kind of thing. These clients won't be dumping Adobe anytime soon.
Xara could certainly try and pickup the people at the fringes - those not involved in a collaborative pipeline. At a commercial level, they too would have to wonder if getting people to retrain in Xara and give up the benefits of the Adobe suite is worthwhile for the savings involved.
The Xara/Magix customer base is predominately hobbyists, lone professionals, or very small organisations with a couple of seats, using Xara because of the low price-point and bang for the buck. It's a great product, but not in the same league as the Adobe suite, so consequently Adobe users won't be flocking to buy Xara because of a change in the way they get their Adobe fix.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Chris, I agree that you can use the Creative Cloud software, just like any other desktop software, and that's what I do and probably most people do. That said the cloud moniker also applies to the notion of distributed working, because you get some cloud storage and installation of software on multiple platforms, so the cloud idea also embodies the notion of being able to access your assets while away from your desktop.
As you say though, the cloud can just be on your desktop, if that's all you need.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ckh
...now I'm paying $50, so $600 per year. Still beats the price of upgrading for me and to boot, I have all their software I can try out.
And do you actually use all those applications you are paying $600 a year for? I mean really using them?
For myself, all I use and will ever use is InDesign and Illustrator. The 18 to 22 month update cycle to a major revision cost me $120 for ID, $175 for AI. That equals $295 every 18 months, or roughly $196 a year. Until this past upgrade cycle, if client work did not require it, I could skip the upgrades and not be out any money.
In other words, if Adobe did not have sufficient advances in the software and if client work didn't require a new version, Adobe got no money from me. My choice whether to spend the money. If the past Cloud year is any indication of how quickly Adobe will roll out updates and changes or new functionality, the Cloud is looking like a means of marketing cutting back on expenses, increasing revenue, for little effort into programming and investor hype. They have near zero reason to innovate, fix bugs that have been in PS, ID, and AI for countless years.
Unfortunately, it may work.
Mike
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
The bottom line is quite simple. If the value of Adobe software isn't worthwhile, then don't buy/upgrade/subscribe.
That's all any of us can do. Adobe decides what they wish to charge.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Thanks guys for your comments. From what you're saying, it seems that graphics software is being used far more collaboratively than ever before, and that Adobe has a lock on that, as Microsoft does for Word and PowerPoint collaborative work.
At 69, am glad I came up in the '60s ad agency world, where allowing a client to have any input whatsoever in the design process -- let alone handle the art boards -- would have been absolutely unthinkable. And, at my age, whenever I hear the word 'collaborate' I think of traitors helping the Nazis.
However, still being somewhat rational, I can comprehend that there may be some benefits to collaboration -- there sure are for other disciplines, like Autocad Revit for architects. Although, if graphics collaboration goes the same way as MS Word, you are just opening the door to endless meetings with innumerable design-illiterate people, who will all have to put in their 2 cents worth so as to justify their meaningless jobs in marketing, communications, mid-level management, whatever.
I'll bet that graphics collaboration opens a Pandora's box of wasted time, and ultimately, profits... except for Adobe!
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Great discussion... This topic has surfaced in various contexts over the past few years with regard to a variety of products. No doubt companies like Adobe would love to lock their customer base into generating a predictable annuity income for them -- far easier and more dependable than having to rely on releasing new and exciting features every 12 to 18 months to stimulate new purchases (gee -- that came out even more cynical sounding than I intended!). Companies have been dabbling with this for years. Microsoft ventured into this with corporate clients -- in large part due to the decreasing demand for new versions of Windows and their Office products. Companies that used to routinely re-up for 100,000 licenses for Windows largely stopped this practice with Win XP/SP3. It took years for many of them to move to Win7, and many of them still refuse to. Many of these same companies are still using Office 2007 or 2010. MS had been reaping huge revenue from the previous predictable upgrade cycle. Similar story for Adobe: as nice as the new features might be, for an enormous portion of the work being done, new features are simply not necessary.
Example: folks who need to create and manage PDF's using the features in Acrobat Pro, as opposed to the 3rd party publishers like Foxit, can -- to a very large extent -- do fine with their existing copies of Acrobat Pro 2009 -- and have NO need to upgrade to any of the subsequent versions. While publishers like Adobe would love to motivate users to keep shelling out several hundred dollars a year per seat, for many end users there are diminishing returns to keeping up with the annual upgrade practice. I can still happily run a multi million dollar consulting practice with Win XP, Office 2010 and Acrobat 2009. In fact, for 99% of the work a group like this might do, there is NO downside to doing this. If and when the group decides to get current with new versions in 2 or 3 years, the software will, no doubt, be backward compatible -- and all of today's documents will still load properly.
There's an enormous challenge for software publishers. At some point, once the software is really mature and feature reach, it becomes increasingly challenging to identify new features and add-ons that add enough value to make it worth upgrading. If they can't figure this out -- their only avenue to maintain a revenue stream is to shift users to a subscription model.
I personally believe that product companies must understand this aspect of their product lifecycle early on, and anticipate the product maturity part of the equation before they get there, panic, and look for ways to continue milking their customers to make up for a lack of planning.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
I go back to what I said earlier, no businesses are not going to quibble when they hear $50/month. Single users are going to say, well hell no! that means at least I will have to charge at least $20 extra for each piece of work more, just to be standing still. Don't think they have shot themselves in the foot, it's a goldmine in some areas. I just feel sorry for the single user who will put up with what ever the CS version that they are on. If they get a file which was produced by a newer version of software they might use they're Adobe account for that but I would ask for a PDF version from a client/company and work from that.
I worked with a national Scottish newspaper who were working with Illy version 8, for all their work, when I started, from ads. to cartoons and the like, then taking it into Quark, for layout and publishing, this was only 6 years ago so they are not a great example to use but are they? Everyone who worked there were really comfortable using the software over many years and had never heard about transparency so paid no attention to the problems or the extra scope that that gave them in the design process. With a few others I demonstrated what an upgraded version of AI could do and they bought 3, CS 4 licences. over 12 computers for the ads dept. which included the work that they did on weekend supplements. The reason for mentioning this is to show that when you learn skills and get compliment using the programme you don't really want to further these skills or should I say get the chance in company time to forward skills to the next version. I went to a few Adobe road-show days where they were selling the next version and all it was to us was a free lunch out. How many years since Adobe brought to both AI & PS 3D capability, for AI CS 1, for PS I think CS3. How many tutorials have you seen showing these capabilities, very few I think. This statement is to show that using many of upgraded tools in PS and AI are not that important.
Sorry about being off topic most of the time here but what I was trying to communicate is that the larger firms will think the cloud system rocks while the smaller dept's. will just keep plodding along using the same old versions. Only time will tell which wins but I think very slowly Adobe will die as times are changing in both web and print. Many people said this when Freehand & Flash rule but what happened there, Adobe gave them the push and bought them out. They have too much clout to disappear so I would imagine over the next few years when desktops are out and only touch screens are allowed ,Adobe will be there in some form, maybe not quite as big.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Jon your mind is as bad as mine. Plus your explanation is better than mine.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Times do change. Quark ruled the publishing roost and was pretty expensive. Adobe came along with a cheaper pretender to the throne - inDesign. I think Quark is struggling these days.
Adobe was struggling a bit with Macromedia giving it a kicking with Flash and Dreamweaver. Adobe had the cash and swallowed up their rival.
Things change. Just think how Blackberry and Nokia ruled the phone roost. Sony?
Adobe has no clear rival that I can see.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pauland
...Adobe has no clear rival that I can see.
It's that pervasive thinking that Adobe is best at, not their software. Mistaking market share for software excellence pervades the marketplace.
Microsoft also bought their way to market dominance. Better word processors, spreadsheet applications and db managers went the way of the dodo because of it.
And Quark? I'll wager more publications were laid out in Ventura during the years it was alive than QXP and PM combined. It's db publishing was used widely.
It too was killed off, but even its last Corel version has features that ID will never have.
All the foregoing ramble is to say that one doesn't need to make a better mousetrap. One just needs to garner more market share to "win."
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
I miss Ventura. Ended up using Framemaker for long documents. But Ventura was one sweet program.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Wow I remember ventura from the eighties. Anyway this thread just shows the, well if not importance then the impact of adobe on the design community, 53 replies and counting.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
I don't think the Adobe's approach of a forced cloud subscription is going to end up good.
I am staying away from Adobe products and will start implementing other software in my business workflow.
If you want to read more, Check out this blog. I personally think its time to fire Adobe and move on to other software like Xara, Corel, etc. There are many options.
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2013/05...html#more-9251
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
@Pauland -- Framemaker, arguably the least graphics-oriented DTP program ever devised, actually does one thing quite well. It lets you embed Flash SWF animations right into the PDF, right on the page. Embedded, not linked to. This can make for very interesting ebooks, where you can view the animations on screen, but also print them out with a fully graphical page layout... headers, footers, all that... with the animation showing only the first Flash frame. You can see the Flash pieces in Acrobat Reader, but not with other PDF viewers, like Apple Preview.
Beyond that, I've seen tech writers actually make 2500-page PDFs with Framemaker. Better than Word!
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
FrameMaker was the first DTP program I ever used. I remember using it to create course notes for a training course I was asked to teach. All the fun of duplicating boxes and putting a black one under a white one to fake shadows.
I really liked the program.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
So what's your recommendation -- if Ventura's gone, and InDesign's too costly, is there a good DTP program out there that can output decent PDFs, and can handle, say, a 100-pg document? What are people using for DTP if we rule out InDesign, Word, OpenOffice Writer... and Framemaker? Is Microsoft Publisher still around... and is it worth using?
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
@jon404 -
If I ever clean my basement office, I may actually find the install disks for my last copy of Ventura... :)
MS Publisher still exists -- MS is currently offering Microsoft Publisher 2013 for sale. I understand they've added quite a number of features to this latest version -- might be worth your time to check it out.
Word is...an interesting proposition. I've used pretty much every version of MS Word, beginning in about 1987 when it was truly an awful product, and WordPerfect was kicking it's a**. To this day, it still has some annoying quirks -- but once you learn these, you can make it sing and dance pretty effectively. I missed the part of this thread where Word was ruled out as a contender for your interests (or was it?); if doc length is the concern, even as long as 6 or 7 years ago, there were noted examples of Word managing documents as long as 10,000 pages (no typo there). I have used it to prepare and manage docs well over 100 pages with multiple sections, complex tables and numbering references to external documents, loads of embedded media, etc. It definitely slows down as the document gets big and filled with images -- some of the tricks that help you get past this include use placeholders for images and only rendering when you're in print preview mode. It helps to have a large fast hard drive and lots of working RAM too. You definitely don't have the level of control that a commercial professional DTP program offers -- but I'm curious: what features do you need that Word doesn't include?
You might also take a look at:
- Scribus
- Serif Page Plus
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Thanks Jon -- I'm over on the amateur side these days. Since retiring, I've written three books, using Framemaker and Open Office Writer. Will NEVER bother with producing a print book ever again... too much work for too little money. After several years, am now getting 70% of sales from PDFs sold via my own website... 20% from Kindle, and 10% from print -- Amazon and bookstores.
So the next one I write will be designed for PDF delivery from the start, leaving printing to the customer. This frees me up to write a book of any size, without having to calculate the page count 'sweet spot' between printing costs and sale price. Or bother with the print-book sales channel, although Ingram, Lightning Source, Amazon and Barnes & Noble have been straightforward to deal with.
So back to DTP software. PDF output means I can make highly graphical pages. Integrated images and text. Went out to the garage earlier and dug out old Microsoft Publisher 2007. It should work... has the same graphics controls as PowerPoint, which are quite useful. Yes, they have a new version, for about US $100... but I'm not sure if I need it. We'll see.
As to MS Word. Before retiring, I did multimedia design at Qualcomm in San Diego, California. Most of the tech writers used Framemaker. Job security; nobody else could understand its intricacies. The engineers refused to use it, and passed in their documents in Word. And we had several people... like you... who were brilliant at getting the most out of Word. But they were totally sneered at by the Frame writers, some still on UNIX boxes, who never could understand that their Type 1 Courier font wasn't the same as the Courier New used by the engineers on their documents.
Anyway, we'll see how MS Publisher works out. Between Xara products, old Photoshop 7, and a few useful utilities, I'm all set!
Jon Donahue
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jon404
So what's your recommendation -- if Ventura's gone, and InDesign's too costly, is there a good DTP program out there that can output decent PDFs, and can handle, say, a 100-pg document? What are people using for DTP if we rule out InDesign, Word, OpenOffice Writer... and Framemaker? Is Microsoft Publisher still around... and is it worth using?
Serif PagePlus. Other than running heads/feet (ID sucks with this too), image captions (VP was so good), and a few other niceties, it does a really good job. Like with Xara where I will do as much work as possible even if I need to eventually return an AI file, if at all possible I will use PagePlus. New version out pretty soon ;)
Mike
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
@Jon - another thought - since you're building PDF's...do you have access to a copy of Acrobat Pro (or the equivalent)? You can load up any number of files (PDF's, Word docs, image files, etc.) and have it stitch them all together into a large single PDF. Would that help? Just one more option in your toolkit...
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Mike -- will check out Serif PagePlus. Noticed that Publisher 2007 does not have auto-TOC or auto-indexing, oops. Guess DTP programs are like cameras -- each one does something neat, but none do everything well. That's life.
Jon -- yes, I have Acrobat Pro. Which, along with my old Photoshop 7, I conveniently ignore during my sporadic rants against Adobe, the bloated commie-fascist bloodsucking corporate vampire. Acrobat's so darn good.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Still use an up to date copy of Page Plus works pretty well for small to medium publications. Has a super Mail Merge which can be used for tickets as well as the office stuff. Gets a bit lost in the packaging for export in larger illustrated books and mags for sending to the printers as all that you get is a PDF. If you have an a Adobe account you can still download InDesign CS2 for free from their site as it is such an elegant bit of software that work well from biz. cards to very large publications and is worth having on your H/disc.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
The two greatest things adobe have created as far as I am concerned are Photoshop and the PDF format.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
This is insane. Just insane. No more future Adobe software for me if they don't offer a perpetual license system. We are walking $ signs to Adobe. No one in their right mind should think of joining this subscription scheme.
You can't just alienate your customers like this and force us to pay forever or leave with NOTHING to open our files with. It's simply unacceptable. No matter how awesome the new features might be. We need to have a safety net to fall back on. And that is a perpetual license. With this scheme Adobe will OWN us for life. They got us by the balls if too many of us agree to this madness...
We cannot trust Adobe. That's why I don't want to chain myself to them forever. But I would still use and buy their software if I think it is of value to me. With the right upgrade price, and the ability to skip a version if I wanted to.
But a Cloud hostage situation is unacceptable and the worst possible case for the end user.
If I have a perpetual license and Adobe does something I don't agree with in the future. Well... I know I can still use the current version to work with. With the Cloud that safety net is gone for us. *POOF*.
This is a deal breaker no matter how good the software might be.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Know1
If I have a perpetual license and Adobe does something I don't agree with in the future. Well... I know I can still use the current version to work with.
in fact that is exactly what adobe has just done: somthing you don't agree with
so now you stick with the current version... right, just like you say you would do in the future...
so where exactly is the difference between somewhere in the future, and right now?
we are at the end of the road when it comes to new releases with great new tools - very few want to upgrade anymore just for the sake of it, and the money isn't there for the innovation any more; what else is adobe supposed to do?
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Originally Posted by
handrawn
in fact that is exactly what adobe has just done: somthing you don't agree with
so now you stick with the current version... right, just like you say you would do in the future...
so where exactly is the difference between somewhere in the future, and right now?
There is a big difference! I cannot stress this enough. Imagine you do join the Creative Cloud and in the future Adobe does something you don’t agree with. You can’t just walk away then. If you cancel your subscription you will be left empty handed, no way to open up all the files you have created during your Creative Cloud period. But You do still have clients who expect to be able to get updates. So you are forced to pay and be chained to Adobe forever.
So you do realize that you don’t actually get to keep the latest version of the software when you quit right? You don't get anything. All your PSD/AI and other files become essentially useless.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Ckh:
You think of it as "rental", I think of it as paying for the software over a period of time instead of all at once. The first year, I paid $30/month, now I'm paying $50, so $600 per year. Still beats the price of upgrading for me and to boot, I have all their software I can try out.
And when you stop paying how are you going to open up your files in the future? Just keep paying forever and ever for that privilege to do so? Because you won’t have a license to run the software anymore. Have you really thought this through? How can anyone agree to this?
There are some excellent opinions and summaries about how users feel on the Adobe Creative Cloud forums.
Quote:
Jon404:
For example, can XDP import the latest CC .PSD and .AI files (if that's what they're still calling them) without errors?
No. One slightly older Adobe version may even complain about compatibility issues.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Originally Posted by
handrawn
We are at the end of the road when it comes to new releases with great new tools - very few want to upgrade anymore just for the sake of it, and the money isn't there for the innovation any more; what else is adobe supposed to do?
Quote from Shantanu Narayen - President and CEO of Adobe (December 2012):
"I'm pleased to report we delivered record revenue of $1,153,000,000 in Q4. This performance helped us achieve record revenue of $4.4 billion in fiscal year 2012."
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Know1
There is a big difference! I cannot stress this enough. Imagine you do join the Creative Cloud and in the future Adobe does something you don’t agree with. You can’t just walk away then. If you cancel your subscription you will be left empty handed, no way to open up all the files you have created during your Creative Cloud period. But You do still have clients who expect to be able to get updates. So you are forced to pay and be chained to Adobe forever.
So you do realize that you don’t actually get to keep the latest version of the software when you quit right? You don't get anything. All your PSD/AI and other files become essentially useless.
then you don't do it in the first place, as has been said several times...
but if you are in a team where you must then it's a business expense, like the electricity bill... hell that's more than adobe's subscription for me and the companies are are mostly no better, but I'm stuck with them too
if enough people refuse to sign up adobe may change their minds.. but it is their product, they can market it how they choose.. there are alternatives
and remember the customers who subscribe are the ones adobe will listen to - they will have clout, they won't just let adobe get away with anything, it's not all one sided
oh and on the final point about revenue - that figure does not mean a lot because revenue is turnover, not profit....
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Know1
And when you stop paying how are you going to open up your files in the future? Just keep paying forever and ever for that privilege to do so? Because you won’t have a license to run the software anymore. Have you really thought this through? How can anyone agree to this?
For me it's doable. I'm not an artist or graphic designer. I mainly work with html and php files, which I can use other editors, even notepad, to open and work on. I use photoshop to edit existing files, I'll have to make a modification to something that doesn't require a lot of artistic talent. I do use pdf's. I have Acrobat X Pro installed, my wife uses the CC version and uses it more than I do. I do have some clients that always use the latest and greatest and will have to modify one of their psd's once in a while, so I need to keep current just so I can work with them.
So, adobe photoshop CS6 is about $650 on Amazon, a year of creative cloud membership. Design premium is about $1200, two years worth of cc membership (.5 updates included). Design and web premium is the one I had, $1400. Master Collection $2200. So for $1800 spread over 3 years, I have access to all of their products, all the upgrades, etc.
There are other programs that will open/edit pdf's, psd's, etc. so I'm not worried. Besides, I can always save a copy that is compatible with older versions of photoshop, though I probably won't go to that trouble.
For me it works and I'm not worried.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Originally Posted by
handrawn
then you don't do it in the first place, as has been said several times.
I know, while I still have a choice in the matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
handrawn
and remember the customers who subscribe are the ones adobe will listen to - they will have clout, they won't just let adobe get away with anything, it's not all one sided.
Really? I have to disagree. That's kinda my whole point about this new subscription model. Adobe will be able to get away with a lot. Users will not have a choice. What can they do? Stop paying the monthly fee? Oh wait... they can't because you will lose access to everything and can't continue to work. Try explaining that to your clients. And yes, at the moment most companies will still have a recent perpetual license to fall back on (CS5/CS6)... But that is going to change so fast with this subscription system.
That's why it is so important to have a license that doesn't require you to pay every month forever! This is not a 'deal' you are getting, it's a simple way of locking you in for life! And as a company or freelancer you need to have a safety net to fall back on. It's too important to just leave everything up to Adobe.
But you're right. It won't be my problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
handrawn
oh and on the final point about revenue - that figure does not mean a lot because revenue is turnover, not profit....
That's a fair point.
http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pres...2Earnings.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ckh
There are other programs that will open/edit pdf's, psd's, etc. so I'm not worried.
PDF's? Yes. That's a pretty universal file format.
Indesign files? Nope. Don't count on it.
Illustrator files? Yes and no. In Xara Designer I can open a lot of them. But the AI files I get are mostly simple flat vector files. So I don't know about the more advanced stuff and how that will translate.
PSD's? Well.... Only the most basic PSD files will you be able to open up in other programs. Only use standard layers and vector text layers if you want to be sure not to run into problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ckh
Besides, I can always save a copy that is compatible with older versions of photoshop, though I probably won't go to that trouble.
I do think it is bit naive to say that you can 'always save a copy that is compatible with older versions of photoshop'. Or you must be working only with the most basic features. Just use some smart layers/adjustment layers/layer effects in one file and try to open it in an older Photoshop version to see what I mean.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ckh
For me it works and I'm not worried.
Ok, that's fine. I am obviously biased against the Cloud. But as long as you know what you are getting yourself into and are happy with it, great.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
ok we disagree - actually I am no supporter of the adobe position, but not a detractor either, what I do support is the right to market your own stuff your own way [within reason granted]
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
There is a petition going on against getting rid of perpetual licenses all together.
If any one here would like to see it come back let Adobe know by signing this petition:
https://www.change.org/petitions/ado...cription-model
It has 25,000+ signatures so far.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Read this on the PhotoShop forum...
Quote:
This is a great analogy of renting from elsewhere on the forum
Question: Why do car companies lease cars?
Answer: Because it makes more money for them, and it leaves you with less money!
The same is true for any product.
Anyone trying to justify/explain what Adobe is doing needs to keep this in mind.
Now imagine if every car company decided that they were going to stop selling cars and would only lease them.
They could sell it to the public with BS like: "You will always have a new car!" and "Now you won't have to wait for new features anymore!"
To continue the analogy, cars at the end of their lease would be destroyed so there wouldn't be a pesky used-car market. Sort of like not letting people sell their software licenses anymore, like the CC.
Everyone would eventually have to lease because the old "Perpetual License" cars would become obsolete and end up in junk-yards.
The car companies could speed this process up by refusing to sell spare parts anymore. Sort of like refusing to upgrade software anymore.
Oh...and for all this benefit, your cost of driving will of course have to go up by 2 to 3 times.
What do you think the reaction would be?
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
well since I don't own a car, because I am blessed to live in a place where it is not essential and I have better things to do with the money it would cost to keep one I don't need to use most of the time - and I hire one if I need one for something specific, my answer to the question 'what would my reaction be' is: 'not a lot'
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Edit: never mind this post.
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
why - someone would lease cars and then hire them out to people like me - that's called enterprise
but my comment was not really serious anyway because actually it's a very bad analogy.. you can't compare cars with adobe software because anyone can legally build a car, but only adobe can legally build photoshop etc
-
Re: Adobe commits suicide
Quote:
Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose...
Janis Joplin
Noticed yesterday that Microsoft's doing this too -- sort of, maybe. For example, Publisher 2013 is only available as a download... no CD. But you can move it from PC to PC, and it's not a subscription deal. They have cloud storage, too... but not tied to your continued subscription payments.
I'm with Xara here. Bought P&GD 9 the other day -- instant download and registration. Also ordered a CD, which will come in the mail, by and by. Best of both worlds. No weirdo bloodsucking vampire subscription contracts!
EDIT -- about leasing a car -- actually, it can make sense. Yes, it does cost you much more than driving the same car for, say, 10-15 years. But you do get to drive new cars on lease during that time... like a new one every three years... good for reliability and safety particularly if you live in a bad-weather area. Best of all would be to do what people did in the '50s and '60s... just buy a new car every three years, then trade it in on another. No nasty lease mileage-limits to deal with. But few people do that now; the average price of a new car is too high... even accounting for inflation, they cost more now because of all the safety gear. Thank God Adobe doesn't make cars!