Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adobe Photoshop CC Pirated in One Day?!  (Read 14441 times)
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #40 on: June 25, 2013, 12:12:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I think Yaredna makes an excellent point, Jeff - care to respond ?

Nope, because Yaredna points not based on facts but speculation...he/she/it doesn't understand the implications of a dual licensing scheme–do you? If you did, you wouldn't ask the question.
Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 639


« Reply #41 on: June 25, 2013, 01:00:37 AM »
ReplyReply

If you did ... you wouldn't ask the question.

The only question was 'would you care to respond ?'
And you did in one word - nope.
Thank you.
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #42 on: June 25, 2013, 01:32:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Way back in the early days of engineering CAD drafting, a company called Autodesk developed AutoCad and it ran on a PC not a mainframe.   There were several other full blown CAD systems costing many thousands of dollars, well protected, and not highly used - they disappeared in the '80's.

AutoCad was quite easily hacked - numerous people are still using hacked AutoCad.

As a result of the many hacked copies being used around the world was that AutoCad became the de facto standard for engineering companies, and it still is.  Wish I had invested in it in 1980.

CATIA is alive and kicking ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CATIA )
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #43 on: June 25, 2013, 01:37:02 AM »
ReplyReply

The only question was 'would you care to respond ?'

Ah, but I had already responded to his/her/it's post and I wasn't interested in responding you yours. Let's see, you joined using an anonymous screen name on May 9th, but to your credit you've actually made some useful posts on LuLa not related to Photoshop CC. On the other hand, yaredna joined May 7th–also with an anonymous screen name and pretty much all of his/her/it's posts have been directed towards the Photoshop CC situation. Seems LuLa has gotten a bunch of new members due to the CC announcements...

Well, I'm done responding to new members who choose not to reveal their identities...sorry, hiding behind an anonymous screen name and taking pot shots from the sidelines isn't something I'm gonna engage in. Make of that what you want. There's a reason that new people are labeled "Newbie" when they first join LuLa...it means that as new members, they may not really understand the dynamics of the community. Given that, I tend to discount new member posts–particularly new members that have a clear agenda such as yaredna who seems hellbent on dissing Adobe and anybody with the balls to NOT be an Adobe Hater™...

So, Manoli, you have a choice...care to introduce yourself to the community? Care to offer your credentials? Show some work? Disclose your real name? Be a member of LuLa? If not, the odds of me responding to future questions towards me from you just went way down.
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #44 on: June 25, 2013, 01:39:17 AM »
ReplyReply

trying to run CC subscription with evolving new features and a CS7 with locked in features while not 2X the work is considerably more difficult than what you seem to think it should be.

just don't lock the features, that's it... and don't invent fictional stories about accounting...
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #45 on: June 25, 2013, 01:40:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, let's see, I've managed two engineers
so do you have a dedicated SCM/build/release people ? you didn't... so your experience is ZERO.
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #46 on: June 25, 2013, 01:45:53 AM »
ReplyReply

so, you want Adobe to make modifications just for photographers and ignore the rest of the pro app users? We've already been down that road, photographers simply don't make up a large portion of Adobe users...
it seems they make enough users for Adobe to have a dedicated app for them for them  Wink which is by the way available under both license options and regardless of your "accounting FUD" will get constant upgrades to its functionality shared with ACR... apparently w/o "huge reorganization".
« Last Edit: June 25, 2013, 01:48:55 AM by Vladimirovich » Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 25, 2013, 01:49:26 AM »
ReplyReply

so do you have a dedicated SCM/build/release people ? you didn't... so your experience is ZERO.

Well, actually yes, we use SCM and TestTrack for bugs and code check in/out, does that mean I'm not useless?
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #48 on: June 25, 2013, 01:51:59 AM »
ReplyReply

will get constant upgrades to its functionality shared with ACR... apparently w/o "huge reorganization".

ACR 8.x will get upgraded for CS6 for new cameras/profiles but not new functionality. No new reorg required because it falls under the bug fix/maintenance revenue recognition rules of a perpetual license...
Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 639


« Reply #49 on: June 25, 2013, 02:40:19 AM »
ReplyReply

So, Manoli, you have a choice...

Dear Jeff,
You read an aggressiveness in my post, which was never there. 'Pot shots' ? It was a genuine question, on a point which I felt warranted some consideration. No more, no less.

Sorry to disappoint you, but Manoli is my real name. Although I have only just joined LuLa, it was not for want of trying - but certainly spurred on by the recent CC debacle. It took an exchange with Chris Sanderson to finally get me approved having been constantly rejected by the members application screen. Consequently, I'd describe myself as a 'lurker' of long standing.

FYI, I stopped 'pro' photography back in 1986 but have maintained an ongoing interest ever since. My  photography is of a personal nature, with a few exceptions. No, I'm not interested in displaying my work, and no, I don't feel that that's necessarily a prerequisite for a useful contribution to LuLa.

I'm not an Adobe hater, nor do I feel that the general assault you suffer is warranted. but I do think that the recent events are a monumental mistake, as my few posts make clear.

Finally, not wanting to hijack this thread any longer with a personal statement, you have my full name and email - any further info eg telephone numbers, cv, etc - send me a pm and I'll reply with pleasure.

All best
M

Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #50 on: June 25, 2013, 03:23:27 AM »
ReplyReply

You read an aggressiveness in my post, which was never there. 'Pot shots' ? It was a genuine question, on a point which I felt warranted some consideration. No more, no less.

As I said, you have made some useful posts not directly related to Photoshop CC...on the other hand, yaredna not so much...that's what I was referring to as pot shots...

If you have been paying attention to recent posts relating to the CC announcement by Adobe (which happened May 6th just a day or so before a lot of newbies seemed to have joined LuLa) it seems that anybody that tries to explain Adobe's position regarding subscription vs perpetual licenses is tagged as a pariah even if speaking the truth...particularly when speaking the truth that photographers don't want to hear.

Here are the facts...Adobe started a subscription service with CS5.5...it was mildly successful. With the release of CS6, subscription licenses grew faster than expected. It was a revenue model attractive to Adobe for several reasons–first it evens out revenue and allows for the addition of new features during the subscription cycle. Perpetual licenses are restricted because of revenue restrictions that limit new features for perpetual licenses (this point has been debated but not disproved). Adobe had major problems when releasing the subscription/perpetual licenses for Photoshop CS6 13.1 and 13.0.4 because of the different code required for subscription/perpetual licenses (there is some debate that this should be a problem–but Adobe saw it as a major problem). Adobe decided to kill the perpetual licenses for what would have been CS7 and offer only a subscription license for Photoshop CC and to continue to sell and support Photoshop CS6.

The shyte hit the fan...

Photographers got rather upset even though photographers as a group are a small minority of Adobe Pro app users (which when I pointed this out I was castigated for even though I was simply telling the truth).

Many people transferred their hate for Adobe towards me because: 1-I didn't see the CC announcement as being all bad (the engineers are largely supportive because it means they can add new features without being restricted by accounting rules) and 2–I didn't jump all over Adobe and offer unconditional support for photographers...

So, when you asked that simple question, you weren't asking a simple question. You were asking a charged question that had ramifications (and still does).

We'll see how things shake out...let's see where we are 1 year from now. For now, current users of Photoshop CS3 and above can license Photoshop CC for $9.95 a month. That's a cost of $119.40 in fees to use Photoshop CC or users can buy a perpetual license for CS6 which Adobe has stated will be undated for the foreseeable future. But apparently this doesn't satisfy many of the vocal critics...

Ya know? I really don't care that much any more...I have a subscription for the entire CC suite of products (I use Photoshop, Lightroom, Illustrator, InDesign and Acrobat on a regular basis). Guess what, I see the CC as a deal for multi app users...I also see $9.95/month as a deal for Photoshop CC (yes, only for the next year where the price may be increased...kinda like ATT Universe will go from $19.95/month for the next 6 months and then go up).

And yes, I'm getting pretty tired of the same old pissing matches that seem to occur. Nobody is gonna solve anything by posting anything here on LuLa...but it seems to offer a release to some that want to vent and rant. I'm pretty much done with that now.
Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 639


« Reply #51 on: June 25, 2013, 04:29:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Photographers got rather upset ...(which when I pointed this out I was castigated for even though I was simply telling the truth).  Many people transferred their hate for Adobe towards me ... I didn't jump all over Adobe and offer unconditional support for photographers...

And I thought I made it clear that the ' general assault you suffer is unwarranted'. On reflection I think I understated the unwarranted part.

There is life after CC ...
If I offended you in any way, I apologise, it was certainly not my intention.

Now, peace pipe ?
« Last Edit: June 25, 2013, 04:36:23 AM by Manoli » Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3767


« Reply #52 on: June 25, 2013, 04:49:43 AM »
ReplyReply

For now, current users of Photoshop CS3 and above can license Photoshop CC for $9.95 a month. That's a cost of $119.40 in fees to use Photoshop CC or users can buy a perpetual license for CS6 which Adobe has stated will be undated for the foreseeable future. But apparently this doesn't satisfy many of the vocal critics...

C'mon Jeff, you can do better than that, can't you? The $9.95 a month is only available in the USA, and is a temporary discounted rate for a limited period (and doesn't it require an annual commitment?). After that period the additional money invested in the software (which many of us already have as CS6 perpetual licence), and some of the benefits gained with new features, is out of the window with nothing to show for it, the moment one stops with perpetually paying the higher fees.

Also that CS6 will be updated for the foreseeable future is somewhat dubious. Are you so sure that bugs that have currently been fixed in the CC version of Photoshop, are also fixed in CS6 perpetual? I haven't seen any updates for my CS6 perpetual license product for some time. Of course new features available in ACR-8 in the CC version, are also not available in the CS6 version of ACR. So what does updated mean, in practice.

And of course this is not the only explanation for the reduced satisfaction of vocal critics and other Photoshop users ...

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
gbillett
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #53 on: June 25, 2013, 06:01:04 AM »
ReplyReply

'There's a reason that new people are labeled "Newbie" when they first join LuLa...it means that as new members, they may not really understand the dynamics of the community'

Care to explain what these dynamics are,  or where we can find them?

With Lula's corporate move into social networking you may get a load of fresh 'newbies' who might not stay under the withering criticism you deliver.  Can the administrators of the site make clear what the 'dynamics' of the Forum are for their benefit.  Or are these the dynamics of Schewe?   

I have learnt a lot from you Jeff,  sorry to see you come down so hard on people making their opinions.  Is your strident defence of Adobe personal or is it a corporate stance this site takes?  After all you market products associated with Adobe products. 

Many of us feel Adobe have shafted its photographic user base - your intolerance of this view being expressed ( and of good people making this view ) is the issue here too. 

And although I maybe a newbie i have followed this site for many years as I am sure other 'newbies' have. 

I must say for those drifting in from Facebook ( and I really like the Facebook pages ) this really isnt a very good advertisement.
Logged

Geoff Billett
www.geoffreybillettphotography.co.uk
www.spanishcivilwarphotography.co.uk

Author From Earth to Air   and Gateway to Nirvana
Photographs from Andalucia and the 2013 Kumbh Mela
gbillett
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #54 on: June 25, 2013, 06:15:00 AM »
ReplyReply

ps

'As I said, you have made some useful posts not directly related to Photoshop CC...on the other hand, yaredna not so much...that's what I was referring to as pot shots...'

Who are you to comment on how 'useful' other member's posts are?  A level playing field here - I think not.  'Usefulness' of posts lol.  Never seen that before. Are you a secret moderator?

Logged

Geoff Billett
www.geoffreybillettphotography.co.uk
www.spanishcivilwarphotography.co.uk

Author From Earth to Air   and Gateway to Nirvana
Photographs from Andalucia and the 2013 Kumbh Mela
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2832



WWW
« Reply #55 on: June 25, 2013, 06:50:39 AM »
ReplyReply

When you go into a new pub, you figure out the dynamics for yourself, don't you? Come in wild-eyed and ranting, your face hidden, and you and others are not going to be offered a tasty pint, are you? Hey, the pub's got a Facebook page. So that makes any difference?

You'd get a better hearing if you assumed others here are honest and refrained from snide comments like "you market products associated with Adobe products". This whole thing is a bit more nuanced than the kind of debate you find on Facebook, you know.

John
Logged

gbillett
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #56 on: June 25, 2013, 07:39:36 AM »
ReplyReply

When you go into a new pub, you figure out the dynamics for yourself, don't you? Come in wild-eyed and ranting, your face hidden, and you and others are not going to be offered a tasty pint, are you? Hey, the pub's got a Facebook page. So that makes any difference?

You'd get a better hearing if you assumed others here are honest and refrained from snide comments like "you market products associated with Adobe products". This whole thing is a bit more nuanced than the kind of debate you find on Facebook, you know.

John

Hi John

Are Jeff's posts remotely nuanced?   Interestingly in other threads the debate is better with less vitriol and codemnation.   Is it just the CC issue here dividing loyalties?  I do assume people are honest until they start unreasonably lambasting others and apparent lack of effective moderation asks further questions.  More effective site management would mean those questions do not even arise.  For the record I have no doubt in anyone's integrity here.

Face hidden?  I have provided links to my websites previously,  here again www.geoffreybillettphotography.co.uk  and www.spanishcivilwarphotography.co.uk.  I'll add them as a signature.

I cannot help but repeat myself - I have learned enormously from this site,  from Jeff,  Michael,  have purchased books and videos etc but cannot stand bullying.  Until last year I spent a career as a Community Psychiatric Nurse ( maintaining photography as a means of personal expression ) supporting people mostly suppressed by prejudice and marginalisation.  I enjoy Jeff's robust style but I feel it has gone too far recently.  I have seen the stifling results of bullying too frequently.

Yes the Facebook page does make a difference.  Lula is more corporate and the move to a Facebook page is not accidental.  It wants and needs more people on its books.  It is a new age now - Adobe has recognised that and doing what it believes in to make those changes ( rightly or wrongly),  similarly Lula is doing the same.  The knowledge base available here is to be admired and respected but new friends will not be made by some of the attitudes expressed and comments made about 'newbies' and the wanton decrying of people who make comments others might not agree with. 

As for pubs I do not use them;  too many barrack room lawyers.  I prefer continental bars which are less staid in their ways and flexible to customer's needs.  If your interpretation of nuanced means entering a smoky old bar and staying quiet for 5 years before being allowed to make an opinion,  or offering deference to the opinion of 'betters',  it is not my way. Sorry.
Logged

Geoff Billett
www.geoffreybillettphotography.co.uk
www.spanishcivilwarphotography.co.uk

Author From Earth to Air   and Gateway to Nirvana
Photographs from Andalucia and the 2013 Kumbh Mela
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2832



WWW
« Reply #57 on: June 25, 2013, 08:26:12 AM »
ReplyReply

I did say "This whole thing", not Jeff's posts, and smoke was banned from pubs long ago, quite rightly. But thanks for providing the links - do put them in your signature because I doubt I'm the only one who will be fascinated by the Spanish Civil War project (not looked at the other link yet).

Anyway, I'm not sure Jeff has become any more strident and suspect it's more a matter of reflecting the hysteria back at its author! You sow what you reap, and anonymous posting just encourages these spiralling arguments. Is Lula more corporate? Not sure, at least not yet.

John
Logged

Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #58 on: June 25, 2013, 09:36:06 AM »
ReplyReply

bug fix/maintenance revenue recognition rules of a perpetual license...
and so will new features... you just do not charge for them, so revenue recognition is very simple...
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #59 on: June 25, 2013, 09:37:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, actually yes, we use SCM and TestTrack for bugs and code check in/out, does that mean I'm not useless?
Jeff... "use" != "have a dedicated team" (who just does that on a full time basis), that what makes difference between a small business (as "yours") and Adobe.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad