Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 19 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adobe - Creative Cloud Update  (Read 29905 times)
StephaneB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #260 on: June 15, 2013, 11:01:12 AM »
ReplyReply

The dependance on PS is not directly related to its superiority, it is related to the ton of IP I have created using PS that is only useful when using PS.

This is the core of the issue here, Adobe is using our past trust in them to screw us.

Who wants to keep working with a supplier with such credentials?

I have the same potential problem. If at some stage PhotoShop does not run on the last Windows iteration, I'll see. I usually re-visit layers over a few weeks, rarely more than that. I still hope my best and most precious pictures are yet to be done. And even then, how precious, really? These are pictures. OK, some of you sell them, or you get paid by the time you spend taking them and producing them, but really, how often do you really need to change a layer in an old picture? And if you do, do you get paid for that? If yes, well, you know the new price of your tool.

I do not feel Adobe has screwed me. I always understood the money I paid was for a certain product, not for anything else in the future.

And about what Adobe credentials are you talking about?

The credential to have made PhotoShop?

The credential to have made Camera Raw?

The credential to have financed actual fundamental research in our field so we can have tools we could only dream about before?

Who else does that?

DXO does. Look at their prices, not on the cheap side either.

And anyway, your current PhotoShop should work for many more years. After all, it is a pretty reliable product. Another blunder from those scumbags at Adobe, I suppose.

Logged


Stéphane

My Webpage

StephaneB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #261 on: June 15, 2013, 11:03:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Stéphane,

You seem confident that reactivation of CS6 will be possible ...

Cheers,
Bart

Reactivation? Oh, you're on Apple? Well, try to get the supplier you chose not to break your applications. This has nothing to do with Adobe. If that is your concern, have you tried to get a CS6 for Windows? Did they refuse?
Logged


Stéphane

My Webpage

mistybreeze
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


« Reply #262 on: June 15, 2013, 11:04:48 AM »
ReplyReply

I am not a pro…but bear with me

After reading the gibberish, I don't think so.

Anyone caught in such a dilemma today only has themselves to blame.

That's right, blame the loyal customer. Just goes to show, you don't need an education to be a photographer.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2332


« Reply #263 on: June 15, 2013, 11:25:28 AM »
ReplyReply

That's right, blame the loyal customer.

Did the "loyal customer" make a purchase to benefit themselves, or purely to benefit the seller at cost to themselves?
Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3012


« Reply #264 on: June 15, 2013, 11:28:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Reactivation? Oh, you're on Apple? Well, try to get the supplier you chose not to break your applications. This has nothing to do with Adobe. If that is your concern, have you tried to get a CS6 for Windows? Did they refuse?

Hi Stéphane,

I'm not running CS6 on a Mac, but on on Windows (for a number of reasons). So the OS shouldn't be the problem. But what do you think happens when you install the software on a new hard disk, new OS, new hardware? Do you trust Adobe enough to be confident that activation will not become a problem? If so, dream on.

Cheers,
Bart

P.S. Just some friendly advice, it might be a good idea to make a mirror sector/partition copy of your working CS6 installation hard disk.
Logged
StephaneB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #265 on: June 15, 2013, 11:30:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm not running CS6 on a Mac, but on on Windows. So the OS shouldn't be the problem. But what do you think happens when you install the software on a new hard disk, new OS, new hardware? Do you trust Adobe enough to be confident that activation will not become a problem? If so, dream on.

Thanks for your advice and pardon my too quick assumption. Well, I don't know. I do expect the activation to keep working, yes. Call me naive, but I have yet to go through a different experience.
Logged


Stéphane

My Webpage

chez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302


« Reply #266 on: June 15, 2013, 11:31:44 AM »
ReplyReply

After reading the gibberish, I don't think so.

That's right, blame the loyal customer. Just goes to show, you don't need an education to be a photographer.

Misty...you know dick about me and my education. I think you just might be surprised. No one is blaming the loyal customer...but if your business is hanging out their on some proprietary formats...YOU are only the one to blame getting your business in such a situation. Blaming Adobe for this shows me how much "business" education YOU really have.
Logged
mistybreeze
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


« Reply #267 on: June 15, 2013, 11:45:32 AM »
ReplyReply

you know dick

Yep, that's an education to be proud of.
Logged
chez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302


« Reply #268 on: June 15, 2013, 12:04:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Yep, that's an education to be proud of.

Sometimes you have to speak to the level of your audience for them to comprehend.
Logged
mistybreeze
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


« Reply #269 on: June 15, 2013, 12:18:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Are you a member of APA, ASMP or PP of A?

I joined my first professional organization soon after my first professional job decades ago. But to be honest, the only reason I joined was to gain eligibility for the group HMO plan. Self-employed individuals endure great frustration in their quest for affordable health care. The early 90's were among the scariest years I can remember as a business owner. All it took was one simple X-ray to be dropped from your health plan with a $3,000 deductible.

I'm a member of two pro organizations today, but that's because I've grown more political as I've gotten older. My circle of photographer friends care deeply about copyright issues, but I have to say, working with ignorant politicians is like getting teeth pulled with no novocaine (or reading posts from the ignorant around here).

No former assistant of mine (who has gone off on his own) can afford membership dues in pro organizations. These guys and gals are living from paycheck to paycheck, and they all seem to carry hefty balances at the rental shops. A working photographer in NYC often feels lucky if he can just lower his debt.

As for working for free, I know one 30-year-old photographer who just shot a spread in a famous fashion magazine. He's 2 months late on his rent (he needed that money to pay what the magazine would not pay, "editorial" ya know), and has no clue when he'll see his next paycheck.

I work hard not to judge people by what they can and cannot give. Everyone's capacity for giving is different. If you're a star, then I judge.

Working photographers are not a charity. We are not a Union. Many of us compete for the exact same job, and in this day of digital, where everyone with an iPhone and Photoshop is a pro photographer, we have no choice but to protect our style secrets if we wish to continue in this maddening job.

The concept of working together to help my fellow competitor is often at odds with protecting my business. There's always a delicate balance when it comes to giving support.

if photographers were better organized, they would have a stronger voice at Adobe.

Sorry, I just don't buy that. No voice is louder than yours, and there are plenty of pros who pay attention to what you have to say. If you can't strong-arm Adobe to pay attention to pro issues, with your mouth to Thomas' ear, than nobody can.

Yes, there is power in numbers. If all photographers boycotted Adobe tomorrow, maybe we would see some action. We all know that ain't gonna happen because we're trapped. Until a competent competitor comes along, we're stuck with the monopoly.

From my perspective, Adobe is no Apple. The crash hit all of us hard in 2008, and Adobe failed to develop a new product that would take a new market by storm. They were stuck with many customers who did not buy into their 18-month upgrades. Many of those customers could not update without fear of a business shutdown or a costly IT bill. And there were thousands of customers who couldn't afford to stay current, with or without all their peripherals. This is a fact. This is the reality that surrounds me daily, listening to my former assistants for the past four years.

Adobe needed to do something to bring in more money, and we all see what they decided to do.

IMO, it's never a good thing for a business to create hating customers. And if there's one sure way to piss off a customer, double the price of something they've grown accustomed to using in their business. (Are there any female executives at Adobe who know what happens when a beauty salon doubles the price of a manicure?)

For the life of me, I don't understand why Adobe refused to consider the small-business photographer (and all those energetic, enterprising people who are dedicated to David Hobby). All Adobe had to do was set a reasonable parameter, like no incorporation or some kind of provable sole-proprietor status, and set a fair price. As long as Adobe provided a reasonable financial solution for this group, all the hate chatter would be unnecessary.

In the meantime, we're left with the perception that Adobe does not care one bit about its loyal small business customers or all the amateurs who got caught up with having the biggest and the best. The perception of a company saying FU, NOW PAY UP to any of its customers can never produce a positive result.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 12:29:56 PM by mistybreeze » Logged
Glenn NK
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 235


« Reply #270 on: June 15, 2013, 12:26:49 PM »
ReplyReply

A few random thoughts.

1)   CS is nearing the end of its development cycle - there isn't much more that can be added or improved.  As a product matures, more effort is required to achieve smaller improvements - with smaller/fewer improvements, what's the incentive to buy the latest version?   If the product isn't gaining in sales (or even possibly that sales are stagnating), profit is reduced.

2)  Many users do not update with each issue of CS, buying only the alternate versions.  This only provides 1/2 the income from these users.

3)  Software doesn't wear out.  Features may improve, but it still works unless one requires an upgraded computer/system.  I'm running all the software for an engineering business (word processing, spreadsheet, CAD, engineering specific software) on an XP machine - replaced the MOBO last year and re-installed XP.  $100 for the MOBO, and $25 for the re-install.  A new OS would require a new machine.  I'm in business to make money not spend/lose it.

4)  No matter the ownership of Adobe, income must keep coming in both for the shareholders and the employees (according to Wikipedia it has over 9,000 employees).

What's the solution?  Increase income.

How do you increase income in light of items 1) through 4)?   The first step is to get users committed to a product (they already are).

Corporations have been defined by some as a pile of money without a conscience.  We'll have to get used to the concept.


Glenn
Logged

Economics:  the study of achieving infinite growth with finite resources
Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 729



WWW
« Reply #271 on: June 15, 2013, 12:54:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Like any corporation, Adobe is just looking at maximizing their revenue and profits. An objective of "screwing us" has never crossed their minds.

I'd wager a bet that a group of shareholders with voting shares pushed for this subscription model. Adobe is using its leverage in the industry to increase their income.

I'd also wager that those people complaining would do the same, if they were in such a powerful position.
Logged

~ CB
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5255


WWW
« Reply #272 on: June 15, 2013, 02:49:58 PM »
ReplyReply

I'd wager a bet that a group of shareholders with voting shares pushed for this subscription model.

You would lose that bet...as I recall, in the lead up and release of Photoshop 5.5 and CS5.5, Adobe offered subscription based licenses. It was actually successful–not over the moon successful but successful enough that with the release of CS6 Adobe would make a huge marketing effort to push the subscription services for single and the full package. All of these decisions were made by the execs and approved by the board of directors and I seriously doubt any shareholders had any input. Why? Because the decision to do CC and drop perpetual licenses was done over a very short period of time.

Telling tales out of school may come back to bite me but during the CS7 beta, it was CS7 right up to the point it turned into CC. Adobe had not planned on dropping perpetual licenses during the initial development of CS7. It was around Feb of this year that everybody at Adobe got really, really tight lipped. I can usually get people to tell me everything but there was something going on that even most of the Adobe employees weren't aware of.

What I do know is that when the CS6 updates went out at the end of the year in 2012, the updates for the subscription and perpetual licenses caused major problems. Running a dual code branch of both subscription and perpetual licenses where new features were added to the subscription but only bug fixes for perpetual resulted in what I'll refer to as FUBAR...fixing the problems resulted in engineers coming in and working over the holidays and really pissing off many employees and their families.

Somewhere along the line the decision was made to quite developing the perpetual licensed Creative Suite 7 and move everything over to subscription only and dropping the Creative Suite brand (not something one would do lightly given how much Adobe has spent building that brand) and moving everything to the Creative Cloud.

So, to those who think this CC is all about greed and milking the user base for every last drop of money I'll tell you Adobe really doesn't do that sort of thing. Adobe has not got a history of anti-competitive behavior (yes, they got into some hot water with the Aldus takeover but that was settled). For those who don't trust Adobe to keep the activation servers going for CS6 look at their behavior regarding the shutting down of the CS2 activation servers...they gave away non-activation installers and a set of serial numbers. They didn't have to do that...

And while I get painted as an Adobe "defender" I'm really not...I have knowledge of things that others don't have that alters my perception of the situation. I think the reaction to last years upgrade debacle lead to a knee-jerk reaction and the dropping of CS7 and perpetual licenses. I think that reaction was poorly thought out and communicated with a degree of incompetence that I'm all too familiar with. I think Adobe has made a mistake but I do believe they "think" this is the right course of action. I warned them that the shyte would hit the fan and that they needed to be really careful in how they approach the release of this new approach. Then they went and did a really bad job of announcing it at Adobe MAX–jeeesh, again another FUBAR situation. I also think that long term, some good may indeed come of this–increasing the opportunities for new competition, refocusing Adobe on some of the user base that has been alienated by this move (by this I mean photographers).

What I do suggest is let the dust settle to see what transpires for all of this. You can still get a CS6 perpetual license which is only about a year old. You can give Photoshop CC a shot for $9.99/month for the next year ($119 or so) and see whether or not the subscription works for you and if Adobe keeps up it's promise to keep adding new features on a regular basis–this is the thing I have high hope on because I know the engineers are chomping at the bit to dive into new features that won't have to wait 18 months to gestate. If you check the LR5 video tutorial where we talked with Eric Chan on line he mentioned that Upright that showed up in LR5 and ACR 8.1 was a new feature that was put in in about a month–which is a really, REALLY short timeframe. Yes, I suspect the guys doing the original research were working on it for a lot longer, but to go from R&D into an application in about a month is pretty interesting.

So, just to quiet down the rhetoric, I think I've said pretty much everything I have to say so this is a thread I'm not going to keep checking any longer. You all can carry on as you wish.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 02:54:06 PM by Schewe » Logged
mistybreeze
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


« Reply #273 on: June 15, 2013, 04:33:05 PM »
ReplyReply

to those who think this CC is all about greed and milking the user base for every last drop of money

Not all of us would describe Adobe's business mission as "milking." Clearly, from the early days, Adobe had concerns about theft, and little by little they did what they could to fix that. I've never used a stolen copy of the software, and I've never used a student copy to run my business. But I know quite a few assistants fresh out of college (and some working photographers) who did use stolen or student versions, primarily because they could not afford a pro version of Photoshop.

When the license became more restricted, many of us listened to the outcry from these broke yet talented folks who were struggling with the costs of building a business in NYC. At a certain point a child has to grow up and pay off that student loan. Many of us did our part to teach the youngins' that stealing is stealing, but when money is tight, you do what you have to do to survive.

In 2008, advertising expenditure dropped by 40%, practically overnight. And that fact is no exaggeration. Does anyone at Adobe realize what that did to photography businesses? Here it is 2012. Have you seen this month's Vanity Fair? My used toilet roll is thicker. The business has yet to recover.

And while I get painted as an Adobe "defender" I'm really not...I have knowledge of things that others don't have that alters my perception of the situation.

Yes, but given what appears to be a lack of empathy (and now admitted contempt), struggling photographers have no clue which camp is yours. They certainly don't feel you're with them. Reading this thread won't help any of that. You have a way of alienating people, and I think that's too bad. I think you bring a lot to any discussion about digital photography, but people are more sensitive than ever to what feels like bullying. And that's a good thing.
Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1830



« Reply #274 on: June 15, 2013, 04:43:03 PM »
ReplyReply

...
For the life of me, I don't understand why Adobe refused to consider the small-business photographer (and all those energetic, enterprising people who are dedicated to David Hobby). All Adobe had to do was set a reasonable parameter, like no incorporation or some kind of provable sole-proprietor status, and set a fair price. As long as Adobe provided a reasonable financial solution for this group, all the hate chatter would be unnecessary.

In the meantime, we're left with the perception that Adobe does not care one bit about its loyal small business customers or all the amateurs who got caught up with having the biggest and the best. The perception of a company saying FU, NOW PAY UP to any of its customers can never produce a positive result.

Stay tuned and keep pressing - I believe Adobe is listening...
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 729



WWW
« Reply #275 on: June 15, 2013, 05:15:57 PM »
ReplyReply

All of these decisions were made by the execs and approved by the board of directors and I seriously doubt any shareholders had any input. Why? Because the decision to do CC and drop perpetual licenses was done over a very short period of time.

This makes it sound like Adobe was reacting to something and not acting on a well-thought plan. I'm guessing here, but Schewe's post made it sound like Adobe was flailing at something. Perhaps some of their engineers in the trenches were fed up with poorly planned development cycles and were preparing to leave. Again, I'm guessing.

Then again, maybe Adobe is just like Netflix.

That aside, I have been enjoying my CC subscription. The update process is painless and every update has been stable. I utilize four computers at my studio and the process of de-authorizing one computer and authorizing another happens without a hitch.
Logged

~ CB
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 933


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #276 on: June 15, 2013, 06:36:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Stay tuned and keep pressing - I believe Adobe is listening...

Chris, I have also heard the 'Adobe is listening' rumour from a couple of sources now (creativecow.net being one) and so I am totally with you on how this might hopefully be an improving situation  Smiley

So who knows, all this ranting, raving, squabbling and falling out etc, might have been worth it after all - we will all have to wait and see...

Dave
Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3012


« Reply #277 on: June 15, 2013, 07:00:03 PM »
ReplyReply

So who knows, all this ranting, raving, squabbling and falling out etc, might have been worth it after all - we will all have to wait and see...

Hi Dave,

If any of the "ranting, raving, squabbling and falling out etc" has educated the general public around these premises that Adobe is an unreliable "partner", so be it. As has been said (many times before), trust comes on foot and leaves on horseback ...

The current powers that be at Adobe, have done themselves and the stakeholders (which BTW is a much wider audience than shareholders) a huge disservice. Such huge incompetence rarely goes unnoticed, which also applies to the current apologists ...

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7523



WWW
« Reply #278 on: June 15, 2013, 07:18:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I have the same potential problem. If at some stage PhotoShop does not run on the last Windows iteration, I'll see. I usually re-visit layers over a few weeks, rarely more than that. I still hope my best and most precious pictures are yet to be done. And even then, how precious, really? These are pictures. OK, some of you sell them, or you get paid by the time you spend taking them and producing them, but really, how often do you really need to change a layer in an old picture? And if you do, do you get paid for that? If yes, well, you know the new price of your tool.

I do not feel Adobe has screwed me. I always understood the money I paid was for a certain product, not for anything else in the future.

And about what Adobe credentials are you talking about?

The credential to have made PhotoShop?

The credential to have made Camera Raw?

The credential to have financed actual fundamental research in our field so we can have tools we could only dream about before?

Who else does that?

DXO does. Look at their prices, not on the cheap side either.

And anyway, your current PhotoShop should work for many more years. After all, it is a pretty reliable product. Another blunder from those scumbags at Adobe, I suppose.

Not enough time for a detailed answer but:
- I have clearly distinguished several times the talented engineers a Adobe from the business decision makers, I know enough not to see corporations as simple entities.
- I don't remember denying the fact that PS is a great product resulting from past mgt decision to invest in order to create products with great competitive appeal. This has not prevented Abode from being profitable nor from showing healthy growth, has it?
- I have provided a clear list of examples where going back to old files is mandatory,
- I am sorry but I cannot agree with your view that Adobe does not have any obligations towards the users who created proprietary IP using their de facto standard platform. I believe that the CC only decision results in a clear negative value (the loss of the ability to continue leveraging this IP without commitment to keep spending twice as much forever) that is a violation of the implicit commitment made regarding PS being a de facto strategic platform for image edition. This implicit commitment beIng a core input in the initial decision to buy PS.

So they did screw us. Whether screwing us was their intent or not is totally irrelevant, only the results matters. I am not interested in speculating about the reasons why Adobe mgt took these decisions, only about the impacts for me as a faithful user having spent probably close to 10,000 US$ on Adobe products over the years.

Cheers,
Bernard

« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 07:28:48 PM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
MHMG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 577


« Reply #279 on: June 15, 2013, 10:20:15 PM »
ReplyReply

I really have no axe to grind with Adobe management. They can do what they think is best for the company. That said, I've heard it repeatedly said by Adobe experts that I'm not Adobe's prime customer because I"m not a graphics pro even though I've spent more money on Adobe software in the last several years than with any other software vendor.  Why do I even use InDesign, PS, and Acrobat if I'm not in Adobe's core constituency?  Well, Adobe's got color management working right (except for Acrobat lately), and on the Mac platform at least, this appears to be a singular accomplishment since even Apple Colorsync has had it botched up for two or three generations of OS upgrade. And I like/need layers and masks in PS so LR doesn't fill the bill (and may follow the rest of the Adobe offerings  totally into CC subscription land for all I Know), but other than these very basic color management and image editing requirements, I don't need the full blown creative suite. Could plan B spring to life relatively quickly for folks like me? I think so. In fact, I'm providing feedback to two independent software providers at this moment who are paying close attention to my needs. I don't think my needs are that tough to meet, but I'd be the first to admit that only Adobe has met those needs up to this point in time.  Nevertheless, there's an easy prize to be won here. Time will tell how important my business and that of other folks like me has been to Adobe.
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 19 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad