Boycott Creative Cloud?

[Mike Wickham]

If you haven't heard, CS6 is the last CS version. From now on, you have to rent your applications via the Creative Cloud. I don't like the new subscription model. I have bought every CS upgrade since version 1, but it looks like CS6 is the end for me, even if it means keeping an old computer around just to run CS6 applications.

Perhaps Adobe would change its mind in a few months if most everyone avoided signing up for the subscription. In any case, they've created a real opportunity for competitors.

[walterono]

What alternatives are people looking at? I haven't managed to find any 64 bit graphics applications (for Windows). What alternative raw converters are people using?

[MW Design]

@Walterono

PhotoLine, for Windows (there's a Mac version too) installs both a 32-bit and 64-bit version on 64-bit Windows.

It is a dated looking interface. Frequently updated. Updates can (and have) included new features during a major revision number. the two brothers who do the programming concentrate on squashing the few bugs that creep in and adding features rather than redoing the GUI. It has been around for years and years.

Mike

[wes1]

Count me into the boycott. I am so sick and tired of this greedy world. I, like so many others. am a hobbiest photographer but, even before the photography, I have used Adobe PS since its inception, even when there was no layers. I am an anatomist and used it long ago to put make images that I used in my teaching. I have always loved Photoshop and felt comfortable with what I thought was a trusting company with their long list of customers being of interest. Now, I, too, feel like they just want to gauge their custmers for a lot more money. I do have CS6 but will be looking for something else if Adobe follows through with the CC S**T. I am tired of being a slave to all of their greed. First they pull you in with a nice program and then kick the legs out from under you.

I hope that all of the Adobe people are proud of themselves.

[Guest]

Here's a novel idea.  Dust off your old 35mm slr and load it with black and white, shoot it, soup it, run it thru your dusty old enlarger, smell the stop bath....and become a photograher again. Somewhere Ansul Adams is smiling.

[wes1]

Sorry, I am too old to spend too much time in the dark. That time will be coming faster than I want it to. I might have to shoot only jpegs though if RAW convertors will be a problem. I have experience with the old methods but had rather stay in the present. Dealing with greedy people is never pleasant for me. Thanks for your suggestion though. Be my guest to spend time in the dark room and be happy.

[Guest]

Creative Cloud can go to hell. I will never rent Photoshop. Adobe is out of touch with a large swath of its users.

[pf22]

Gary Politzer wrote:

Creative Cloud can go to hell. I will never rent Photoshop. Adobe is out of touch with a large swath of its users.

Adobe has made, I believe, a conscious decision to walk away from the enthusiast/semi-pro photographer market, and concentrate on the design studios and agencies; Hell, they're even ticking off some of the pro's!

I was talking to one of my clients today, a pro photographer who, believe me, doesn't have to worry about the cost of the software, and he was absolutely outraged by what Adobe have done. He said that if he could work entirely in Lightroom, he'd dump Photoshop in a heartbeat, unfortunately that's not an option for him.

[Jeff Schewe]

pf22 wrote:

I was talking to one of my clients today, a pro photographer who, believe me, doesn't have to worry about the cost of the software, and he was absolutely outraged by what Adobe have done. He said that if he could work entirely in Lightroom, he'd dump Photoshop in a heartbeat, unfortunately that's not an option for him.

So, was this a rational outrage? Or is he just outraged at change? There's a difference...a lot of "outrage" is based on little or wrong info from people who haven't even tried a subscription model. Adobe has made it pretty cheap to test this for the next year, $9.99/month. I suggest people stock up on CS6 and then consider doing a subscription to Photoshop CC for a year and see for themselves whether or not a subscription model works for them...particularly if the cost isn't an issue.

[station_two]

Jeff Schewe wrote:

…particularly if the cost isn't an issue.

[Mike Wickham]

I suggest people stock up on CS6 and then consider doing a subscription to Photoshop CC for a year and see for themselves whether or not a subscription model works for them...particularly if the cost isn't an issue.

And if everyone did that, it would make it easy for Adobe to say, "Look! Everyone signed up for the subscription! It's a great idea for everyone!" Then Adobe would dump even the ability to buy an old CS6 version. There would be no turning back for anyone.

A better idea is for anyone interested in checking out the subscription to wait a year. Put a little fear in Adobe, so that they don't remove our choices.

[Noel Carboni]

They've already removed the choices, Mike.  A company the size of Adobe can't change direction in a heartbeat, so you may need to accept that it is what it is for now. 

At the end of a year, maybe Adobe will say, "Y'know, we could make another hundred million dollars if we just sell a new kind of perpetual license".

It's up to everyone to determine whether the products are worth what Adobe's asking, paid in the way they're asking, NOW.  I think Jeff's advice is good, frankly.  People should make decisions based on value and from a position of knowledge, rather than knee-jerk reactions.

Photoshop CS6 has only been out a year.  If Adobe hadn't changed strategy, you'd be using it for another 6 months or more anyway before a new version was released.  So try Photoshop CC for a month for free.  If you don't perceive the new CC features (which are interesting though perhaps not overwhelming) as having sufficient value, don't act; just keep using Photoshop CS6.  If you do find the features valuable enough, subscribe.  It just doesn't seem all that complex to me.

Regarding organizing a boycott, when it comes down to it if you think anyone is really going to act out of anything other than short term self-interest, you're probably mistaken.

-Noel

[Brad_Trent]

There have surely been thousands upon thousands of posts written on countless geek/photography/technology boards over the past couple of weeks about Adobe's decision to move to this perpetual subscription-only 'Cloud' solution, and I'm not gonna rehash everything I've written in detail (but I will include links to some of it), but the big-ticket items of what most people think is behind the 'Creative Cloud' are as follows:

1. Adobe has pretty much hit the wall with what improvements they can add to all of the Creative Suite apps and realized that a large numbers of users were inclined to forego upgrading on a regular basis because they were seeing very little benefit in what was being included in the latest updates. This is not to say that Adobe isn't advancing the programs, but with most apps so bloated already with features that a lot of its users have no need for, the consumers desire for even more features is frightfully small. Revising the Smart Sharpen filter a fifth time or rolling out 'Bokeh Blur v10' aren't exactly the kind of sexy features to make people want to toss a $200 upgrade fee at!

2. Because of #1, Adobe has seen it's cash flow diminished. They tried to force users to stick to the upgrade track by insisting them to at least be using Photoshop CS4 before being allowed to move up to CS6, but after about a year this hasn't filled their bank account as quickly as they had hoped, so they figured a subscription-only software license was the only was to go.

3. Adobe has promised more 'real-time' updates to its applications as being a major reason we should all love the Cloud, but as referenced in #1, with the apps already so filled to the brim with tools, filters and widgets, most users are left wondering what else do they really need? And even if Adobe comes out with a few new toys down the road, will the ongoing & forever subscription be worth it?

4. Users are also worried that with a subscription-only plan and Adobe assured of a never-ending stream of cash, what will be their impetus to move forward at all? Nobody suggests they will remain totally stagnant, but since there won't really be the need to continue to advance the applications in order to entice users to keep paying for upgrades, it's not a stretch to think the software engineers won't have the same motivation to continually roll out earth-shattering gizmo's either. And without those earth-shattering upgrades, where is the added value to a never-ending subscription model?

5. Far and away the main bone of contention has been the idea that if you decide at some time down the road to stop paying your subscription to The Cloud, you will no longer be able to access the files you had made during the time you had been a subscriber. Sure, if you only have JPEGs or flattened PSD files, you can get at them, but if you're like most people who save your edited files as LAYERED TIFFs or PSD's, you are simply out of luck! And don't go thinking Corel or the GIMP is gonna help you out, because trying to open a file that contains any layers with smart objects, etc., will get deleted. Assuming you're a young professional photographer now, and you spend 30 or so years paying into this never-ending subscription scheme, at the time you decide to hang up your cameras, if you ever want to do anything with your lifes work you will still Adobe's millstone around your neck. The argument that this will just have to become the cost of doing business is simply wrong. Nobody believes Adobe's current projected cost of 'only' $20/month will stay at that level for very long, so you had better budget for what will be a sizable monthly tax that will have to be paid long into your retirement if you don't want your work to be nothing more than useless digital trash.

Anyway...those are the broad strokes. I've written a few more things over at Damn Ugly Photography on the whole Cloud Controversy, some of which is here:

http://wp.me/przPb-1Vp

..and here:

http://wp.me/przPb-1VH

...and here:

http://wp.me/przPb-1Wf

[Noel Carboni]

Brad_Trent wrote:

it's not a stretch to think the software engineers won't have the same motivation to continually roll out earth-shattering gizmo's either.

If you're familiar with Photoshop you'll know that we don't really need more earth-shattering gizmos so much as we need the ones they've already got to work right, better, and completely.  E.g.,

• Filters that have never managed to be updated to embrace 16 bits/channel, the ability to use filters in more ways.
• Filters that need updating to support modern displays, with modern UI features.
• Reported bugs that go unsolved from major release to major release to major release.
• Refinements so that fancy things work more consistently and usably.
• Addition of missing functionality, such as the ability to create arbitrary 3D objects.

From my perspective the things they're doing in Photoshop CC are the right things - upsampling that produces better quality results, sharpening that works better, cropping that works better, Camera Raw features to speed up correction of image deficiencies and distortion, ability to apply Camera Raw functions directly to documents, 3D environment enhancement, bugfixes.

-Noel

[Brad_Trent]

Noel...as I said nobody suggests they will remain totally stagnant, but human nature and corporate culture often go hand in hand. If a company has little to worry about with regard to where the money is coming from, that can filter down to the guys who hafta come up with product development. I'm glad you feel Photoshop is moving forward in a positive way, but there are plenty of users who haven't been thinking the same thing. And there is no denying that it's that lack of excitment is why so many people haven't upgraded to the most recent versions of Photoshop.

Call me a pessimist, but why should I believe Adobe will continue to develop their software as vigorously once they have everyone hooked to The Cloud?

[Noel Carboni]

Brad_Trent wrote:

lack of excitment is why so many people haven't upgraded to the most recent versions of Photoshop.

I question your given.

This is very subjective, but it seems to me the majority of the questions here on the forum are by Photoshop CS6 users.

-Noel

[station_two]

If the "majority" of Adobe software users had been upgrading regularly, Adobe would have not felt compelled to switch to the subscription mode.

In the case of Photoshop, I upgraded to the last several versions exclusively on the strength of ACR improvements.

As reality gradually sinks in, I get the feeling that the future of computing for the masses is at stake here.

[P4rmR41]

Brad_Trent wrote:

2. Because of #1, Adobe has seen it's cash flow diminished. They tried to force users to stick to the upgrade track by insisting them to at least be using Photoshop CS4 before being allowed to move up to CS6, but after about a year this hasn't filled their bank account as quickly as they had hoped, so they figured a subscription-only software license was the only was to go.

Agreed! - PS has been a pretty mature application for many years. New features have become ever more gimicky and optional. The only real reasons to upgrade for me have been compatability issues with OS and change of processor vendor by Apple.

This seems to me a very cynical, not to mention arrogant move by Adobe, showing utter contempt for its customers. Adobe Photoshop has not attained its industry standard status in a vacuum. It has been acheived through the loyal support of a vast user base, who individually, over time, invest hundreds if not thousands of dollars purchasing this software and its upgrades at already premium rates. Not to forget the significant time and money invested in educational material learning to use the software. - Which makes the glib retort I've seen so often recently on various forums and blogs: "If you don't like the new cc model go elsewhere," so effing galling.

Content creation software are the tools of trade for artists, designers, illustrators etc. They are not utilities like electricity or telephone lines. Tools of trade are what we need to earn a living even when times are lean, especially when times are lean. It's really despicable to think that a company which produces tools for creative industry would seek to impose a model that is bound to hurt a lot of people who need to earn their living using these tools. Not all artists and photographers even earn a living from their work.

I don't think that Adobe will relent on their decision to go subscription only and I think they will do very well financially because of it. I only hope other software companies whos products I use, do not choose to go down the same route.

I have owned: PS 4, 5, 7, CS2, CS5 and now CS6, (would have been CS7 or 8 were it not for this creative cloud stunt), very likely the last version of PS I will use. I need to own my tools not rent.

[Noel Carboni]

P4rmR41 wrote:

I have owned: PS 4, 5, 7, CS2, CS5 and now CS6, (would have been CS7 or 8 were it not for this creative cloud stunt), very likely the last version of PS I will use. I need to own my tools not rent.

Isn't it clear?  You're not the customer Adobe wants.  They want customers who upgrade to every new version, the day it's released.  Those folks clearly get more value from Photoshop and are giving more to get that value.

Adobe might say to you in return that you've been showing contempt for them by not buying each new release.  They do all that hard engineering work for years then from you... nothing.  Do you provide a web site where they can complain about your poor support?

Some years from now when the old version of Photoshop you have is no longer cutting edge and the stuff other people can do with their state-of-the-art software is looking fresh and different, perhaps you'll re-evaluate your choice to avoid the subscription model.  Maybe you won't be able to live without what Photoshop can do then.  Or maybe it will not be good enough even then to entice you to get on the rental plan.  Or maybe a competitor will have shown up.

You seem to want to make this into some kind of emotional thing.  It's just about value.  Adobe's got the goods, and if you want to play you have to pay.  Are goons coming to your house, forcing you to buy Photoshop?

-Noel

[Brad_Trent]

Noel...no disrespect intended...but you seem to have a pretty bad attitude when it comes to anyone who is against The Cloud. And since the For/Against rate on the Creative Cloud is running about 9 to 1 against, you are also in a very big minority.

And you'll hafta excuse the majority of us who are a little emotional about this whole deal, because unlike you, we do not see any added value to the Creative Cloud. What we see is an extremely profitable company that we used to consider as an ally in our business, now looking to ensure their ongoing profit by tying their users to a perpetual subscription scheme on a software suite that will in all likelihood not advance as has in the past, despite their assurance that this is the primary reason for moving forward with the scheme.

BT

[Noel Carboni]

Thanks for your honest opinion of my attitude.

I'd like to think I'm being neutral.  As a businessman what I'm NOT is prone to knee-jerk reactions.  Something is going to cost a little more than it did.  It's not the only thing.

Sure, if I had my 'druthers I'd prefer buying upgrades to perpetual licenses (which I actually have been doing, every version).  I'm concerned that there's no "exit strategy" (i.e., no ability to quit the cloud with a functional modern version of Photoshop).  Perhaps that will change, but it's not driving me to drink because I didn't have plans to quit upgrading Adobe Photoshop anyway.

I feel the tools have enough value that I'm still getting a good deal with my subscription.  As a career software engineer, I may have a different feel for the value of this software than most folks.

Honestly I don't see a problem with a software company looking to make a profit from their hard work.  They have engineered something no one else in the world has been able to create.  It's surprising Adobe hasn't squeezed its customers harder before now,.

-Noel

[Tom_Murray_1]

I hope Adobe begins to make a profit soon. Meanwhile, when is the telethon.

[Noel Carboni]

Tom Murray 1 wrote:

I hope Adobe begins to make a profit soon.

1 year chart...

-Noel

[station_two]

Apples and oranges.  Stock trading prices are not the same as profit. 

Still, notice the dip in May.

[Noel Carboni]

Yes, there's no doubt the market reacted to the negative publicity Adobe got for its strategy change.  But the price only returned to the level just prior to the run up before the announcement.

And regarding profit...  Just think, if you'd invested a few thousand in ADBE last year you'd have enough to pay for a creative cloud subscription for a loooong time.

Don't look now, but executive management in the new millenium is all about boosting stock price.

-Noel

[*Photonic]

Brad_Trent wrote:

Noel...no disrespect intended...but you seem to have a pretty bad attitude when it comes to anyone who is against The Cloud. And since the For/Against rate on the Creative Cloud is running about 9 to 1 against, you are also in a very big minority.

And you'll hafta excuse the majority of us who are a little emotional about this whole deal, because unlike you, we do not see any added value to the Creative Cloud. What we see is an extremely profitable company that we used to consider as an ally in our business, now looking to ensure their ongoing profit by tying their users to a perpetual subscription scheme on a software suite that will in all likelihood not advance as has in the past, despite their assurance that this is the primary reason for moving forward with the scheme.

I agree, but I also appreciate what Noel has been presenting to those of us trying to get our minds around the major change Adobe has slammed us with. I think Noel is just trying to help us see the writing on the whole about Adobe and this situation -- and that writing says, "MONOPOLY."

Adobe has a superior product in Photoshop and enjoys a huge user base. For the modern corporation with aspiring officers working their way up the later, more profit means happier stock holders. So in the corporate environment Adobe is being quite smart and innovative. That is, unless they lose their user base by doing something "very not smart," and causing profits to drop.

The Change.org consumer petition, "Eliminate the Mandatory Creative Cloud Subscription Model" at:

http://www.change.org/en-CA/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cl...

could be an indicator that Adobe has indeed done something "very not smart."

There are now over 20,000 signatures and climbing. My guess is that most of these folks are proudly boycotting CC. And as most marketing folks know about surveys (and petitions), you can multiply the results by a factor of 10 to determine general public opinion. So far, that's a lot of unhappy people.