P: Allow CPUs without AVX2 to install Adobe Products

@JLCKJC2015 
Okay, sorry about that.
It's strange because those of us with AVX (not AVX2) can have up to LRC version 14.0.1 (Camera Raw 17) and PS version 25.1.3, which are the ones I have without issues. There have been minor stability and compatibility updates for new cameras, but it's not possible to upgrade to v14.1, which AVX2 required. Now, it seems to me that the current LRC version is version 14.3.1, and in the case of PS without AVX2, version 26 was not available. The current version is 26.4.1. Camera Raw and camera compatibility updates have also been received for those of us who have incompatibility issues. Just to know, what processor do you have?
In any case, regarding communication with Adobe's support team on this issue, it's been useless, so the only option is to exert pressure from the community.
In any case, people who have installed the version that requires AVX2 and have processors with AVX only did so without using the CCD, editing one file, and had no problems.
Cheers,
D.G.

You may have misunderstood my post. My computer does not support AVX2. Even so, Creative Cloud offerred and allowed me to install the earliest 14.X.X versions of LR Classic that apparently did require AVX2 support. This is what caused numerous issues for me which included Slide Show not running. My only solution was to down rev to version 13.

@JLCKJC2015 
OK. I wasn't aware of any issues with people who had computers that  did support AVX2 until now. But in short, I contacted user support several times, first, to explain to me why we needed AVX2 and they never gave me a technical answer, they just repeated that it was the requirement, as if it were an unquestionable (rationally) order that came down from "heaven." They were also unhelpful when the administrator "expelled" me from the community for questioning the requirement (I clarify once again, without having exceeded the rules of conduct, nor could they prove it). There was always someone "above" who authoritarian wielded power, without dialogue or reasoning.  In other words, doing the opposite of what an open forum for a community of users, not corporations, should be. 
I believe middle management isn't aware of the strategic guidelines adopted, not by marketing, which go beyond the technical and enter the purely commercial realm. Engineers should be aware of them, because they follow guidelines issued "from above", but they are shielded from contact with users.
I think what can be done on the forum is to unite people around a concrete proposal, like a Change.org petition or similar, that gathers signatures.
Cheers,
D.G.

I too would like to see this requirement reveresed if possible and a legacy mode offered as has been done in the past. I was caught in the transition when the earliest 14.X.X releases were offerred. My CPU was not flagged as "Incompatible" so the update installed. That resulted in a crippled installation. Some features like Slide Show stopped working unbeknownst to me. My catalog was also uppgraded and by the time I descovered the issues created by the upgrade I had performed a large number of edits. I had to down reveve my installation including my catalog resulting in a loss of all those new edits. A legacy mode would likely have avoided this mess.

Not a good look for Adobe. And to make matters worse they still offere the update to me through the Creative Cloud App so users beware!

Adobe's Tech Support Team (second tier) is aware of this issue but the only solution they have at the moment is to down reveve your system. They also suggested I post in this forum to get the attention of the Adobe Marketing and Engineering team. Based an the comments of others I imagine this is a fruitless action, but you never know.

Jim

@dbur971 
I agree with you on the request.
I don't know if this has happened before with Adobe, but one way might be to let people know that there are many affected subscribers. As long as people remain fragmented, which is the norm now, nothing will happen, but if everyone unites with a single demand, it might mean something, based on the fact that there's no technical reason to have AVX2 for photo editing. In fact, editors like Capture One, which offers more or less the same thing, don't require it, nor do other competitive programs.
Cheers,
D.G.

Please yes revert to support AVX.  This incompatability is a crock.

Or an AVX10 requirement.

Wait for an AVX512 requirement in a year or so...

@ThomasH_on_the_web 
Thanks for your response, Thomas! Well, as long as we're still on planet Earth with consciousness inside our bodies, we can have a healthy debate.
I completely agree with you. I'm not interested in the latest offerings either, eventually (some things yes, others no), but I am interested in ensuring that neither people nor I are run over by immensely rich corporations that want to get even richer. Especially when there's no plausible technical reason, but rather a commercial one, the right thing to do is to charge you less because they're denying you a portion of the subscription you're paying, meaning you get less for the same money. The problem of forced obsolescence goes more unnoticed and unchallenged among younger generations or among the group that is or pretends to be somehow connected to this industry (and wants to score gratitude points). So there's an amoral consent that establishes that if a corporation does it, "it's okay," without debating the "why."
The "at your own responsability" thing is like putting a band-aid on the wound before it actually happens, so as not to give that group an open flank.
Cheers
P.S. The important point is that without AVX2, PS and LRC work fine, which had already been proven before, with the Beta version.

Thank you DexterGordon! A similar debate rages around the TPM2 requirement for W11 to install. In that case also numerous videos exist instructing how to install W11 of course "with own responsibility".

As a veteran in the industry, soon to smell roses and "abuse our great nation" while receiving the Social Security, I am not so eager to get the latest and greatest in hardware, copy local data, restore installed programs (now called Apps) . I know from my practice that we can always write a code using an older set of instructions, or an established older API. I plead to the Software providers, espcially these who promote the SaaS model (Software as a Service) to make best effort in maintaining the backward compatibility.