Having to connect to the internet to maintain licenses....

[davidedric]

I know we did this to death when Adobe announced their "cloud" product line, but has anyone noticed Microsoft's very rapid U turn with the same approach with its new console?

I'm not sure exactly what lessons to draw, but it seems to me that unanimous condemnation from a potential customer base PLUS serious competition (in this case from Sony) can shift even the biggest of players.

Wonder if anything similar could happen here (maybe from Google/Nik if they were so inclined). Shan't be holding my breath, though

P.S. On holiday in Spain, it's 14 degrees and raining, and I'm not taking my gear out in this

[Mike Buckley]

unanimous condemnation from a potential customer base

In the case of Adobe, adoption of CC has been greater than planned. A couple days ago they announced their quarterly financials, which beat analysts' expectations. As a result, the stock rose more than 5% on a day that the major indexes in the U.S. stock market tanked.

[Manfred M]

While I don't like the cost implications; it will cost me about $100/year more that the former upgrade path. The first year is only going to run me $20/month, so definitely something I can live with. The fact that the files will be useless if I ever let the subscription lapse (for now) doesn't particularly worry me as I still have CS6, so I did the CC upgrade.

Fairly painless and the latest release does make some incremental improvements. The big plus is that I was forking over a lot of money every 2 years for an upgrade, and with the new scheme, the cost will be distributed and won't be as much as a single hit.

I don't have the fastest internet around, I max out at just under 4MB/sec download speed and managed to upgrade from CS6 to CC in a few hours. The only part of the package I don't use are the web functionality. So no complaints there, but I can't see doing this in places where there is no broadband. Adobe has certainly targeted the professionals in the developed world and has written off the less connected crowd. Updates to even CS6 happened at least bi-weekly, so the monthly connection to the internet is not going to be an issue for me.

Right now the real losers are going to be the amateurs who will be paying more and pros that are located in more rural areas or live in places with a less developed internet infrastructure. Unfortunately, Adobe has no real competition out there, so we are stuck with what they offer.

[DanK]

Nik is not a competitor to photoshop. Not even close. The only competitors seem to be far behind in market share, such as Paint Shop Pro. My guess (worth as little as most guesses), is that Adobe will stick with its subscription model. The fact that they are considering a new pricing plan for the CC model for photographers suggests they are not about to give it up. I'd also guess that there will be a small shift in the market toward competitors. However, many people who disapprove of the change won't switch, as Manfred's post suggests. I won't. I'm annoyed by the extra cost, but the wasted time and frustration involved in changing software (again, as I only switched to PS a few years ago) would be far more unpleasant to me than the money. they have me over a barrel.

[xpatUSA]

For me, in rural Texas, "connecting over the Internet" is via Hughes satellite: 200Kb/s at best and normally 100Kb/s or less, all the way down to ~10 Kb/s occasionally. No phone lines out here, either.

So, no CC for me, ever. Not that I would anyway, not being a Pro .

Therefore, for folks like myself, retired with all the time in the world to play with an image, Adobe has real competition in the form of any application that runs on my computer and satisfies my simple needs - there are many such . . .

[PhotomanJohn]

i see that owners of CS3 or later versions can get the first year of Photoshop CC for $9.99 per month if one joins by July 31. It would be nice if the price stayed at that level. The complete package is $19.99 a month for CS6 owners. Hmmmm, what to do?

John

[Manfred M]

i see that owners of CS3 or later versions can get the first year of Photoshop CC for $9.99 per month if one joins by July 31. It would be nice if the price stayed at that level. The complete package is $19.99 a month for CS6 owners. Hmmmm, what to do?

John

The $19.99/month is not just for Photoshop, but for the entire CC suite; the entire graphics, video and web design suite. The jumps to $49.99 after a year. Seeing that an upgrade every 2 years runs at around $1000, Adobe has taken a bit of a steep price increase here (about $100/yr).

As I use most of the graphics and video tools, I don't really see much choice here. The only thing that isn't totally clear is that Encore (disk authoring) does not seem to be part of the CC suite (yet?). I came with Premiere Pro CS6, so I'm not quite sure what is up here. There are licencing fees for DVD and Blu-Ray, so I wonder if this might be the holdup.

[davidedric]

Sheesh, guys, I wasn't trying to re-open the debate. Just observing that even 300 pound gorillas have to back down sometimes

[Manfred M]

I think the conclusion is that Adobe has no real competition for their suite, so unlike with the Microsoft / Sony duopoly, there is no competition, so Adobe is under little pressure to change its tactics. Let's hope that this changes at some point.

[FootLoose]

$19.99 or $49.99: that depends on the exchange rate. Clearly, Adobe has said it is not interested in the little guy. But there are a lot of other people out there who make money by teaching how to use Adobe software. If you don't use photoshop, then you are not going to pay for their services either.

And who knows... not being able to fall back on Photoshop to correct or enhance images on the computer just might inspire some people to do a better job with the camera and become better photographers.

[revi]

I think the conclusion is that Adobe has no real competition for their suite, so unlike with the Microsoft / Sony duopoly, there is no competition, so Adobe is under little pressure to change its tactics. Let's hope that this changes at some point.

Adobe is a bit less aggressive about the need to connect as well: they claim once a month is enough, XBox would be once a day iirc, and no resale possible (and many games are interesting to play once only, from what I've seen).

[Mito]

P.S. On holiday in Spain, it's 14 degrees and raining, and I'm not taking my gear out in this

Come down to the Costa Blanca. 24 and sunny
I use Linux so Adobe doesn't interest me.

[BDM]

The problem appears to be that Photoshop and most of the other Adobe products are now mature. New versions do not offer enough new features to entice a sufficiently large number of users to upgrade. In order to maintain cash flow, Adobe came up with the monthly subscription scheme. Time will tell if that works. There doesn't seem to be any real competition for Photoshop at the present time. I don't know if the market is large enough to encourage another software company to develop a competing product. It would no doubt require a lot of money and effort to do that. I guess if you use a number of Adobe products and are interested in keeping them up-to-date the new payment scheme might make sense. However, if you use only Photoshop it doesn't appear to be a very good deal for the user.

[dan marchant]

There is another important difference. The Xbox is an entertainment system, these have not historically suffered from such restrictions. Adobe's CC is a professional tool (or at the very least for really serious amateurs). The post production, film/tv and advertising/graphic design industries have long been used to paying ongoing license fees for their software, so it isn't going to be such a hard sell.

We see a lot of criticism for the move in forums we visit because a large percentage of us are only serious amateurs as opposed to really serious amateurs or even professionals. I am not sure they will be as much of a negative reaction from graphics professionals, which I think is really Adobe's target market for CC.