Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adobe Photoshop CC Pirated in One Day?!  (Read 12453 times)
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1267


« Reply #80 on: June 26, 2013, 12:39:12 PM »
ReplyReply

So long as you don't enjoy my explanations of accounting practice, fine - because that would be worrying.
it is their difficulties and they do not prevent companies to deliver new features in products sold w/ perpetual license... again, M$ has no issues for example... that simply tells that whatever difficulties are there they are all can be easily solved by a big company.
Logged
chez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 340


« Reply #81 on: June 26, 2013, 01:11:31 PM »
ReplyReply

So long as you don't enjoy my explanations of accounting practice, fine - because that would be worrying.

John, I save your accounting posts for late evening when I want to fall asleep.  Grin
Logged
Alan Gilbertson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #82 on: June 26, 2013, 02:06:57 PM »
ReplyReply

As for number 2, no, you don't get it. It's not just two license models, it's two different code branches with two different sets of features times as many applications that would have been in CS7. CS7 was dropped because Adobe had a lot of problems managing both code bases for all the various applications, not just Photoshop. Clearly photographers are fixated on Photoshop but when you factor in the entire suite of pro apps, the problems maintaining two sets of features and code becomes monumental.
Any of us who actually engage with the folks at Adobe understand that point. It goes beyond just the complexities of the code base, although that is huge. The logistics involved in manufacturing a complete set of disks for each product and each version of the suite, the package design, manufacture and shipping for each country, customer eduction and all the other stuff that goes with a major release are immense. The human cost of forcing 50 or more highly creative engineering teams to all meet the same arbitrary deadline every x months is also immense. Like you, I've talked to a lot of these folks, and I've seen the demoralizing effect of having to defer new features because they didn't fit into the strait jacket of a fixed release cycle.

My prediction is that we'll now see a lot more innovation and better-quality code as stress levels go down and the different teams can get back to developing on their individual schedules, as they did before the Creative Suite came along. There are already indications of that. As for the complaints about it all being too expensive, I don't agree. In the realm of industrial-grade tools for the creative field, Adobe has always been the least expensive manufacturer out there -- one seat of Maya costs about the same as six seats of a CS6 design suite. Speedgrade was a hugely expensive product before Adobe acquired them and bundled it with Production Premium. I've never understood how they kept their end-user prices so low, so I'm not disposed to complain.
Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 721


WWW
« Reply #83 on: June 26, 2013, 02:18:28 PM »
ReplyReply

"
....My prediction is that we'll now see a lot more innovation and better-quality code as stress levels go down and the different teams can get back to developing on their individual schedules, as they did before the Creative Suite came along... "


The CS-idea did come from Adobe as well... Why not go back to the individual programs?
I can imagine the stress with the CS versions, not to mention the CS versions + the CC versions combined...
Just - sell - a new version of each program when it is ready.


Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
Alan Gilbertson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #84 on: June 26, 2013, 03:54:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Going back to individual products is an option. It would be a huge (far, far more than CC) price increase for most of their customers, though, and it still wouldn't get round the manufacture, packaging and shipping issues that would force prices even higher. I think we all have to get used to the fact that cloud delivery is the new DVD. It's not just Adobe. Everyone's going to be going that route. I remember the howls of pain when Apple dropped the floppy disk from their machines. How did that work out? Now there are no more disk-based versions of OS X, never mind apps like Final Cut.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2670



WWW
« Reply #85 on: June 26, 2013, 03:58:11 PM »
ReplyReply

You seem obsessed with packaging and shipping. Few people here are objecting to the withdrawal of the boxed version.
Logged

Alan Gilbertson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #86 on: June 26, 2013, 04:59:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't know that "obsessed" is necessarily the right term. Cheesy There are plenty of reasons why the suites were a great idea and abandoning them would be a giant leap backwards. The whole painful evolution involved in designing, manufacturing and shipping a product is just something I happen to be quite familiar with. My purpose in jumping in on this thread and a couple of others is the hope that I might help temper the vitriol with a bit of insight. There are many more constituents, and a lot more factors involved than any one product or a single group of users. The internal discussions on all these things are a long way from being finished at Adobe, based on several conversations I've had. People are still working through all the details, problems, solutions, unintended consequences and "Oh, ohhh. We didn't think of that!" Forums like this one provide great feedback, and are paid close attention to. Take a look at the thread Jeff started on what a new tool for photographers might look like. Why would anyone at Adobe ask him to do that if they weren't interested?

It's human nature that we think our problem is obvious, and our needs are the ones that {insert company name here} should be caring the most about. We do that because these things are in our faces every day; it's what's most real to us. We think, "Well, they obviously know about (x)!" No, they don't. Despite all the surveys, all the interviews, all the research, there are tons of nitty-gritty practicalities that "they" don't know about. It's up to us to tell them.

It's too easy to forget that what we're talking about isn't a faceless entity, but a bunch of real people with the same frailties we all have. Certainly they make mistakes, we all do. It's been to Adobe's credit that even when they don't get it right the first time and even though they can't possibly please all the people, all the time, they're always trying to make their stuff better. I have to give them credit for that even when it's my own feathers being ruffled, because all the Adobe people I've met are genuine, sincere people, the kind you'd happily invite over for dinner. I've looked them in the eye, and I didn't see greed; I saw commitment, real interest in what I had to say and a desire to do great work. I'm pretty confident that the issues will be addressed and solutions that work for both sides will be worked out.

Nobody in the Photoshop team or their management ever said "Photographers? Who needs them? Let 'em rot!" If you know any of them, as surely many people here do besides me and Jeff, you have to laugh at that idea. Yet that's the impression one would get from some of the comments I've seen. I believe that's mean-spirited and wrong. By all means object, point out the error and offer suggestions. Don't demonize people who are quite sincerely trying to do the best job they can on behalf of all the people who use their products.
Logged
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


« Reply #87 on: June 26, 2013, 05:03:13 PM »
ReplyReply

What boxes? Who needs freaking boxes and discs? ... I haven't purchased a boxed edition of Adobe software since they started offering download versions circa CS3 ...
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5421


WWW
« Reply #88 on: June 26, 2013, 05:45:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Take a look at the thread Jeff started on what a new tool for photographers might look like. Why would anyone at Adobe ask him to do that if they weren't interested?

Not for nothing, but nobody from Adobe asked me to post that thread...All the credit or blame rests with me. I don't do things because Adobe asks me to and I don't NOT do things because Adobe asks me not to. It seems most people really have no clue what my "relationship" is with Adobe...it's simple, I don't have a "relationship" with Adobe.

I have friends at Adobe...I consult with the engineers (for free) I do alpha and beta testing (for free). I have given lectures (for a fee) that were sponsored by Adobe. I have written papers for Adobe (for a fee) and yes, a company I'm involved with licensed PhotoKit Sharpener routines for inclusion in Lightroom and Camera Raw (for a fee). But I don't work for nor do I represent Adobe. My opinions (and actions) are my own for good or bad.
Logged
Alan Gilbertson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #89 on: June 26, 2013, 07:27:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Indeed, and thank you for starting it, because it's a great conversation to be having at this stage of the game. My apologies for misinterpreting its origin. I'd have to have lived under a stone not to be aware of your work ("The Digital Negative" is on the bookshelf beside me as I write this). I enjoy the beta testing. It allows me to feel I'm contributing to the product(s) rather than simply consuming them, and it keeps my inner geek happy. I'm sure there are a lot of other folks in this forum who are much the the same way.
Logged
Glenn NK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 259


« Reply #90 on: June 26, 2013, 07:32:34 PM »
ReplyReply

it is not convoluted - we all know that the only reason for "subscription only" is to improve revenue... the rest (difficulties to maintain a code, accounting issues, etc, etc) is just smoke & mirrors...

I felt that was pretty obvious from the get-go.  In fact on some forums, that's the major complaint (cost).

And if it's true, then what's all the fuss about?   The increase in the cost of food has been more significant.

Stuff like that happens, and it happened.

It seems no one is going on and on about the cost of gear, but a little increase in the cost of software and the whole sky is falling in.

C'est la vie - or c'est la guerre.

Cheers

Glenn
Logged

Economics:  the study of achieving infinite growth with finite resources
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


« Reply #91 on: June 26, 2013, 08:55:10 PM »
ReplyReply


It seems no one is going on and on about the cost of gear, but a little increase in the cost of software and the whole sky is falling in.


If it were only cost that changed when comparing the perpetual licensing model to the newly adopted CC rental model ... I would concede that stuff happens ... you have to be understanding and go with the flow. Price being the most recognizable and most relatable factor will take a higher station on the list of complaints. That's just human nature ... everything goes well until you hit someone a bit harder in their wallet.

Unfortunately, at least for me, price isn't only about the cost of CC over perpetual license ... I have never passed on an Adobe software upgrade because I could not afford it or thought the price was too high ... My criteria for an investment in a version upgrade has always been, could the addition of the upgrade generate an increase in income or reduce my overhead by significantly more than the cost of the purchase? It's the same criteria I apply to ANY business purchase I make.

Now Adobe not only wants a bit of a price increase, they also want me to pay in advance for any as yet unseen, unannounced new features that may or may not arrive on any specific timetable ... or further ... if those features will indeed be worthy of my continued investment and actually enhance my bottom line after their inclusion ... Adobe will profit exactly to the degree they wish, no matter what they offer in return ... I, however, may not ... It's more akin to buying a pig in a poke, rather than a thoughtful purchase based upon the known merits of a new product version as we had the opportunity in the past to see proof of product before the investment was made ... It's a bit like a trip to a casino, they will profit if I play, I on the other hand am left to the whims of Lady Luck as to whether I will benefit from my participation. I try to avoid gambling with my livelihood as much as possible.

Most importantly, with the CC model my license of use has an expiration date that can't be altered in any fashion and I no longer have the discretion as to whether I may want to pass on a version if I feel it unworthy of contributing my earnings to purchase a license for it's use. There is no longer a choice ... it is either all or nothing.

There is much more to consider here than just the increase in sticker price and common price fluctuations in the current economy.
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1889


WWW
« Reply #92 on: June 27, 2013, 01:08:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I haven't purchased a boxed edition of Adobe software since they started offering download versions circa CS3 ...
Your loss.
The boxed upgrades from Amazon used to be cheaper than buying a download from Adobe. Not by much, but enough to buy a few beers.
Logged
Steve House
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 222


« Reply #93 on: June 27, 2013, 04:39:27 AM »
ReplyReply

...

Most importantly, with the CC model my license of use has an expiration date that can't be altered in any fashion and I no longer have the discretion as to whether I may want to pass on a version if I feel it unworthy of contributing my earnings to purchase a license for it's use. There is no longer a choice ... it is either all or nothing.

There is much more to consider here than just the increase in sticker price and common price fluctuations in the current economy.
There is nothing in the CC model that compels you to upgrade as new versions/features are released.  They will be offered to you as they become available at no additional cost over the ongoing subscription fee but you don't need to accept the offer.  If you feel a new feature is not something you want, you can simply choose not to install the update.  It's really no different from the perpetual license in that regard.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2670



WWW
« Reply #94 on: June 27, 2013, 05:16:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Nothing compels you to upgrade, but you are compelled to pay.
Logged

Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 486


« Reply #95 on: June 27, 2013, 05:46:52 AM »
ReplyReply

And if it's true, then what's all the fuss about?   The increase in the cost of food has been more significant.
It seems no one is going on and on about the cost of gear, but a little increase in the cost of software and the whole sky is falling in.

Really ? I hadn't noticed that food had increased by the same percentage magnitude as Adobe software.

And as far as the cost of gear goes, I was under the distinct impression that it was going down not up. First there is the D800 which set a new benchmark, Fuji initiating, depending on how you calculate it, a > 20% price reduction, new standards in price/performance products from most of the manufacturers (and software vendors).. etc etc

And all this in a period when gold has declined from $1900 to $1200 in a few months.
A little increase in the cost of software .. ? You may care to review your elementary maths primer - and you claim to be a structural engineer ?






« Last Edit: June 27, 2013, 06:52:20 AM by Manoli » Logged
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


« Reply #96 on: June 27, 2013, 07:33:42 AM »
ReplyReply

There is nothing in the CC model that compels you to upgrade as new versions/features are released.  They will be offered to you as they become available at no additional cost over the ongoing subscription fee but you don't need to accept the offer.  If you feel a new feature is not something you want, you can simply choose not to install the update.  It's really no different from the perpetual license in that regard.

Other than I am required to pay for any improvements and new features whether they are useful to me or not ... that was not the case with a perpetual license. I consider that a very unique and substantial difference.
Logged
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


« Reply #97 on: June 27, 2013, 07:56:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Your loss.
The boxed upgrades from Amazon used to be cheaper than buying a download from Adobe. Not by much, but enough to buy a few beers.

I've never paid full price for an Adobe direct download ... they honor discounts offered by NAPP membership.
Logged
chez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 340


« Reply #98 on: June 27, 2013, 10:34:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Really ? I hadn't noticed that food had increased by the same percentage magnitude as Adobe software.

And as far as the cost of gear goes, I was under the distinct impression that it was going down not up. First there is the D800 which set a new benchmark, Fuji initiating, depending on how you calculate it, a > 20% price reduction, new standards in price/performance products from most of the manufacturers (and software vendors).. etc etc

And all this in a period when gold has declined from $1900 to $1200 in a few months.
A little increase in the cost of software .. ? You may care to review your elementary maths primer - and you claim to be a structural engineer ?

Have you noticed the price increases in the new lens from Canon? At least a 50% increase from previous version...if not more. And here we are talking about an outlay of possibly thousands of dollars from your pocket, not some $20 per month which for many is much more managable.

Cost of gas up 40% last 2 months.
Cost of basket of food up 25% last 4 months

And these costs add up to not $20 / month, but hundreds of dollars per month. Why is not everyone upset over those real pocket book costs, rather than something small like $20/month?





Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2670



WWW
« Reply #99 on: June 27, 2013, 11:04:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Before implying others shouldn't complain, maybe try figuring out how to quote and insert your own comments in a way that makes it easier to work out what you're saying?

As for  your argument, people do respomd to other price rises. Gas goes up, people drive less. Food goes up, you eat less. So what was your point?

Just as the Adobe-hate mob are tedious, it's so tiresome that people want to deny others the right to complain.....
Logged

Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad