[Locked] No perpetual licenses are you serious?

[Mattrman]

I just head that Adobe was planning to abandon its perpetual license in favor of an on line only rental program. At first I thought that this must be a joke. I have been using adobe products for 18 years. Primarily Photoshop, Illustrator and Indesign. I am currently an owner of CS 6 Master collection and obviously do upgrade my products and have consistently done so over the years. I am not connected to the internet full time and in fact my work computer is never directly connected to the internet. So how does this work? Is adobe now forcing me to connect to the internet - it seems that this is the case.

In regards to upgrade cycles, I dont want to rent my software and be tied to a rental agreement. I want to upgrade when I choose, not rent my software like some kind of loaner program!

I want to purchase the software then not worry about it. For instance when I travel, I dont want to be bogged down with downloads and upgrades chewing up my bandwidth. I have traveled to many places where internet access is very limited. Downloading from a wireless card in China is painful, I dont want to be bogged down with no software or large megabyte downloads costing me a fortune on the other side of the planet.

Adobe I know that I am just one person and you will probably not listen to me but did someone ask? No one asked me about this. How simple could this be - I want to buy the software then use it when I want where I want, is this too much to ask?

Please let me continue to use this software in the way that I have used it for so long. If others wish to have the creative cloud then great! More power to them, don't alienate your other users. Please provide both alternatives.

Best regards - Matt

[Kwan Parker]

whatever

[Kwan Parker]

Adobe trying to shut down the thread/

[W_J_T]

^ ? Stop polluting the discussion, have some topic matter or don't post, its counter productive for the discussion.

[Kwan Parker]

Polluting what discussion?

This is a user to user forum . . . elite professional to the rest of the user base . . . looking forward to how professional's spend their money.

Sucking up to Adobe.

Hopefully, "sucking up"  doesn't get me another Red email

[Kwan Parker]

Wonder . . . how many of you guys received Red Email notices?

I'm an easy target.  Almost 65 years old.  Non professional.  Always upgraded from abandoned adobe software.  Low history posting on adobe forums.

Kinda looks like Adobe has a thin skin.

Especially, since in my elder years, i might choke and subscribe to the cloud.

[Kwan Parker]

Did Adobe send me a Red Email notice?

Was there something i posted which got me noticed?  Considering how infrequently i post to the forum, if i disappear, who will notice?

Another voice vanished?  Not like anything i say or think matters.

Having received the Adobe Red Email, poof.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Kwan Parker wrote:

Was there something i posted which got me noticed?

If you can't remember what you posted, I have an email subscription to these forums, so I can send you a copy of the post that was removed.

If they were trying to shut down the conversation, they'd have deleted the whole thread and many many more.  But there's a difference between personal insults and professional complaints about a corporate decision.

Let's bring the conversation back round to the facts.

[Kwan Parker]

Fine . . . Viictoria . . . repost my message from your archived files.

Let's face whatever i wrote.

Not like i'm somebody important . . . like an Adobe CEO or CFO . . . or employees charged with deflecting corporate decisions.

So, whatever i wrote . . . i'll own up to.  Will Adobe?  Or, will you shill for them?

[Kevin-Monahan]

Kwan Parker wrote:

So, whatever i wrote . . . i'll own up to.  Will Adobe?  Or, will you shill for them?

Kwan,

Your post was deleted because you violated the community guidelines. You said some very unkind things about our non-paid volunteers which violated those guidelines. 

Feel free to give Adobe feedback about what you want, but please leave employees and our volunteers working here out of conversations like this. Employees and volunteers working in these forums have no say in Adobe's policies regarding subscription pricing, or licensing, and to say disparaging things about them does not further the conversation.

Kwan Parker wrote:

. . . or employees charged with deflecting corporate decisions.

I'm not deflecting anything from Adobe's decisions. I'm just trying to keep the conversations free of misinformation and personal attacks.

I understand that these are emotional times for some, but we must enforce our guidelines to keep things civil around here. Feel free to critique Adobe, but not your fellow community members going forward and all should be well. We are people too. Thanks for your understanding.

Best,

Kevin

[Kwan Parker]

Thanks, Kevin, for explaining why Adobe deleted my post.

I also rest my case.

Thanks.  I said, some "very unkind things."

For someone who has no professional standing, why would anything i wrote threaten Adobe?

Kevin, you might well have shown everyone a heavy thumb.  Think maybe you have a thin skin. Want to delete this criticism, too?

Prove my criticism right?

Were my comments unkind?  Or, true?

[Kevin-Monahan]

Kwan Parker wrote:

Thanks, Kevin, for explaining why Adobe deleted my post.

I also rest my case.

Thanks.  I said, some "very unkind things."

For someone who has no professional standing, why would anything i wrote threaten Adobe?

Hi Kwan,

I removed your post. Removing posts which attack employees, customers, and volunteers has more to do with keeping harmony in this community than anything "threatening to Adobe." Again, there is usually no problem posting any criticism of Adobe as long as you follow those guidelines. It's always been that way.

Kwan Parker wrote:

Kevin, you might well have shown everyone a heavy thumb.  Think maybe you have a thin skin. Want to delete this criticism, too?

Prove my criticism right?

Were my comments unkind?  Or, true?

By enforcing guiidelines, I disagree. I'm only trying to keep things civil around here. I suggest that we keep things professional by sticking to critiquing Adobe, not each other. Sounds good?

Thanks,

Kevin

[Guest]

Kevin Monahan wrote:

Kwan Parker wrote:

Thanks, Kevin, for explaining why Adobe deleted my post.

I also rest my case.

Thanks.  I said, some "very unkind things."

For someone who has no professional standing, why would anything i wrote threaten Adobe?

Hi Kwan,

I removed your post. Removing posts which attack employees, customers, and volunteers has more to do with keeping harmony in this community than anything "threatening to Adobe." Again, there is usually no problem posting any criticism of Adobe as long as you follow those guidelines. It's always been that way.

Wow So this multi Billion dollar company has a base of  free labor. i was aware that adobe was giving stock options to vendors who offer traing.

Removing posts which attack employees, customers, and volunteers

Any post you guys are removing have valid points. Or are made by people that make valid points. Truth be told you are living in fear of the truth. It is sad to see Adobe join the rat race of seeing people as dollar $ but that is exactly what Adobe is all about. The big studios make movies that sell not movies that make a diffrence. Making an impact on peoples lives takes courage takes skill. it takes alot. Seeing folks for whats in it for you takes the ego of a five year old. It is so easy to to be a white collar criminal. It is easy to be Shum toe and and ruin a compnany. It takes alot to resist greed.

As Adobe Staff you guys should step up and be about whats right. Not about the fact that you will get some stock options. Your weakness is clear and visable! Shung toes looking to rub elbows with BP Haliburton, Bank of America etc. Well  you are supposed to be one of the good guys. You had our love now feel our5 hate. If you dont like what we post it is only the truth that upsets you. The rest is just fat.

[Kwan Parker]

Wow, Kevin, you are good.

How come you've not been around in these forums in any recent years?

Are you an Adobe employee or someone hired to handle the online backlash?

My guess you're a . . . . eh, someone hired by Adobe to try to make quiet their online forums and make examples of easy targets, like me.

How long have you worked for Adobe?

Of course, since until this Adobe Mughal-style takeover, i haven't paid attention.  Nor cared.  Why would i have cared, since i trusted and enjoy Adobe software?

Now, . . . whose trust?

Thanks, Adobe, for sending in Kevin to do damage control.

[Kwan Parker]

Guess I'm right about Adobe's Kevin?  Nobody objected nor rose to his defense.

He could have been a saint, for all i knew.

[Kevin-Monahan]

Kwan Parker wrote:

Guess I'm right about Adobe's Kevin?  Nobody objected nor rose to his defense.

He could have been a saint, for all i knew.

Hi Kwan,

I've got 1,453 posts as an Adobe Employee and the employee badge just to the left here in the forums. Also, check out my blog: blogs.adobe.com/kevinmonahan

If that leaves any doubt, let me know!

Cheers,

Kevin

[camionbleu]

Kwan Parker wrote:

Guess I'm right about Adobe's Kevin?  Nobody objected nor rose to his defense.

He could have been a saint, for all i knew.

I'll rise to Kevin's defense. By the way, as you'll see from my post much further up this thread, I'm strongly opposed to the changes that Adobe is making and I stand by my earlier criticism of Adobe. But Kevin's position seems perfectly correct to me: it's fine to criticize Adobe here but there's no need for personal criticisms of Adobe's staff or volunteers who monitor this forum. What advances our arguments against Adobe's policy is trenchant criticism of that policy (and there has been plenty of that), not personal criticism of Adobe staff members. Ultimately, though, what will really count will be whether Adobe's decision to move to a subscription-only policy is profitable for them.

[skydiver119]

The only way to slow this down or make Adobe listen is to speak the one language the execs understand.....money.

Don't buy into it. Don't touch CC7, and I'd even think twice about upgrading anything with CS6 until you find out whether or not there's any sort of whammy in the code.

The money folks have run the numbers and done the projections and decided that the profit margins are irresistable. They need to be shown otherwise.

When the CEO has to stand in front of his share holders and explain why they aren't getting the profits they were expecting, then there will be some reconsideration.

in the meantime, competitors like Corel and others have a year or so to see what they can come up with. And I'm sure there will be others.  Wait and see what happens.

This online backlash will be largely ignored and discounted. It'll be thought that people are sock puppets or imaginary accounts or some other kind of deception. The one thing that can't be denied is the numbers. And a year from now, when the 400K+ has less than doubled instead of tripled or more like expected, then those execs will pay attention.

We can't afford this. We can't justify shelling out almost 10,000 a year just to access files. Management will lay people off and outsource to a consultant before they do that. And I can't recommend to anyone that we 'upgrade' to a system that holds two decades of files hostage to a monthly fee.

We will milk CS6 for as long as we can and hope that something changes in the future.

[bitm07]

Hi Guys

There is an interesting new post titled 'Creating something better than Photoshop CC', in the Adobe Photoshop section of this website

A link is below

http://forums.adobe.com/message/5341658#5341658

I would be in favour of either option mentioned

[Guest]

That would be another version of the same thing we have. The problem is that to make more money than the already hand over fist billions Adobe was making. They opted to force us to this model. I cannot pay them money now until they and there monopoly are disolved and this current regim is out. Also lightroom is goofy to work in. We need real tools lightroom should have better tools.

[bitm07]

I for one, would still buy a perpetual licence Adode product that does everything I need.  Over any other Photoshop alternative currently on the market.

[Jeff_Know1]

Most of us would buy that bitm07. We have spent a lot of time learning to use Adobe software over the years. Good thing for me I wasn't indoctrinated to ONLY use Adobe software. I CAN jump ship and continue to work.

Adobe cannot afford to start offering perpetual licenses again. They need to aggressively market the Cloud in order for it to work. We need to accept that and realize this simple truth. They are too committed to the Cloud at this point. Consumer "Choice" will ruin their long term strategy they have set out for us.

It's better to look for alternatives now while you still have a perpetual license that works. Otherwise you are going to be forever in debt to the mighty Adobe...

[bitm07]

I can't see Adobe releasing another perpetual version of the full version of Photoshop or similar either.  If they do however, not buying on principle would feel like cutting off your nose to spite your face to me

[Terrachild]

They will change this stupid direction towards the CC if it doesn't pay off.

It is all about money folks.

Boycott the cloud!!!

[flaming1]

I see the petition has just passed 23,500 - isn't that enough to justify a response from Adobe yet?

If you multiply 23,500 by the monthly CC subscription price that's a fair amount of money that Adobe is turning away through their ignorance of the market. Probably small change to them unfortunately, but at least they could give some form of response.

All we see from them at present is a deliberate twisting of the facts...

[W_J_T]

flaming1 wrote:

the monthly CC subscription price that's a fair amount of money that Adobe is turning away through their ignorance of the market

Many educational institutions feel the same about Adobe's inept decision towards consumers.

It's not just individuals, small business and corporations that think the Creative Cloud is an ignorant and poor decision on Adobe's part.

Rightly so.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/05/22/adobe-pricing-plan-raises-concerns

Note: The comments have an Adobe Education Evangelist working hard with PR and marketing nonsense.